Reference: Media manipulation

"Geeks like to think that they can ignore politics, you can leave politics alone, but politics won't leave you alone," Richard Stallman said a long time ago.

It certainly feels like politics or social issues are now being weaponised against Free software. I'll explain. Please read the whole article before leaping to any conclusions (I am not defending Stallman but adding some context, instead).

"His views are not a crime and don't imply behaviour that constitutes a crime."Stallman's views on underage sex (he typically means adolescents/teens) go a long way back. This isn't new. At least 8 years or about a decade ago he wrote about it on his Web site, typically citing some news reports and interpreting various scenarios from a moral and legal perspective. I don't share his views. The vast majority of people don't share such views, either. It's not a crime to merely express such views. ESR expresses similar views in his blog.

There's no need to try to defend these statements; it's possible to support the man's work in the area of software while politely disagreeing with him on lots of other things, including politics (some people cannot tell the difference).

His views are not a crime and don't imply behaviour that constitutes a crime. He did not commit a crime. Cordially agreeing with him on Software Freedom while strongly disagreeing with him on those other things is a perfectly reasonable stance to have.

With that in mind, we assume a lot of readers still don't know what it's all about. Maybe it's better that way. Maybe worse.

"Stallman is, without a doubt, not happy about it. It's a crisis to his reputation and credibility."We've just mentioned it in our latest daily links (in the title even!) and there's an almost-complete compilation of coverage here (blog posts and press reports). If we've missed something, let us know. Our goal is to merely document those things. Stallman is, without a doubt, not happy about it. It's a crisis to his reputation and credibility. We're a lot less likely to ever hear/see the explanation he said he was working on (about his Microsoft visit which we covered here [1, 2, 3, 4]). He has a far bigger reputation issue to deal with at this moment.

Some readers wrote messages to us -- messages to that effect (that he will probably have bigger issues if not scandals to deal with right now). These readers also took note of how it helps distract from the scandal Bill Gates found himself in last week -- to the point of having his PR people bombarding the media with face-saving PR and excuses for nearly a week (if people search the Web for information they're likely to see dishonest denials and distractions rather than original, factual reports).

"To Meeks this is nothing new; to a lot of Free software developers and hackers this is not new. A lot of them very well know about Stallman's views on sexuality."Stallman's views are hardly even new views; they have been public as well (for a long time). I've known about these for about a decade and saw them blasted in various forums about "Linux". Those aren't a secret; they've never been secret. The main news is a particular exchange echoing these views. It's about a few E-mails. The negative press still isn't ending and there's lots more in 'social' media (e.g. here) and sites of developers. Michael Meeks (known for LibreOffice/GNOME mostly) wrote on Saturday: "Luckily I don't look to RMS for ethical statements on sexuality to try to live by..." To Meeks this is nothing new; to a lot of Free software developers and hackers this is not new. A lot of them very well know about Stallman's views on sexuality. Some call it gross, obscene, and perverse. Peculiar? Unusual? For sure. Has he done something illegal? No. Developers have known about it for a long time and the media already pointed out his joke about making love to flowers and his "former Personal Ad"; it says "(Currently for amusement only.)"

How about this one or various other forum posts? Maybe Stallman overuses terms like "sex" -- sometimes failing to foresee how the humour would be (mis)comprehended. There may also be infidelity issues, but again, this is not a crime.

"This whole Stallman focus/angle helps distract from Bill Gates' direct links to Epstein and bribery of MIT's Media Lab (where Stallman is/was), via Epstein himself."The reaction to press reports (which we won't reproduce here) has been mostly anger, sometimes disappointment and rarely fury. Yes, we saw more strongly-worded responses from other developers and few which were sort of understanding. A lot of people made it clear that they don't share Stallman's view on the subject. Neither do I. But putting ethics in perspective, let's look what this media storm helps distract from. In fact, some readers wrote to us about it. They want to point this out. This whole Stallman focus/angle helps distract from Bill Gates' direct links to Epstein and bribery of MIT's Media Lab (where Stallman is/was), via Epstein himself. Again, Stallman's views do not reflect his own actions; we got more mail to that effect, some urging a focus on more direct connections to Epstein. Bill Gates has those connections; Stallman hasn't. Remember that it's not Stallman who met Epstein, even after the sexual crimes were known; it wasn't him who flew the "Lolita Express". That was Bill Gates of Microsoft. He met him in person even after he had been informed of these crimes. Why?

"Remember that it's not Stallman who met Epstein, even after the sexual crimes were known; it wasn't him who flew the "Lolita Express". That was Bill Gates of Microsoft. He met him in person even after he had been informed of these crimes."It wasn't Stallman whose house got raided for child porn. That too was Bill Gates of Microsoft. Stallman doesn't have child porn. Bill Gates' house does. It was reported in the mainstream media 4 years ago. Various associates of Bill Gates are also connected to Epstein and Epstein decided to leave one of them lots of inheritance money. Those are facts that cannot be denied, only distracted from. It wasn't a GNU developer who admitted that he had molested/raped kids (and was arrested for that months ago). That was Microsoft Peter, who is still in prison (his employer has collapsed since, partly due to severe credibility issues). Microsoft Peter spent nearly a decade attacking GNU/Linux constantly; he also played an instrumental role in the openwashing of Microsoft and pushing the "Microsoft loves Linux" lie. He acted as Microsoft's PR courier and came to dominate the Open Source section (all of the articles in that section were about Microsoft when he was arrested).

It wasn't and isn't GNU people pushing child porn; that's what Microsoft does. Microsoft's stance on child porn may shock you. This has to be read to be believed! I was rather shocked by it myself...

The latest bunch of reports about Epstein will definitely haunt Bill Gates for some time to come (maybe decades); no matter how many press companies he has bribed for reputation laundering, as he still does, quite a few outlets still report on it. They dig deeper and find a growing number of connections between Gates and Epstein. This won't be good for his fake 'charity'. It's used for lobbying and bribery, including of media outlets all around the world. Can someone explain to us why bribing colleges (or admissions) is an arrestable offence when you're 'only' a celebrity and not a crime when you're a famous rich criminal (found guilty already)?

"Bribing colleges (or admissions) is not hard, especially when you have a fake 'charity' and can bribe the universities/colleges 'upstream' (above admissions), as a certain college dropout does a lot, under the guise of 'charity'."There's lots of press about an arrest for that (in recent days; it's everywhere).

Bribing colleges (or admissions) is not hard, especially when you have a fake 'charity' and can bribe the universities/colleges 'upstream' (above admissions), as a certain college dropout does a lot, under the guise of 'charity'. On at least one occasion (MIT) he made the payment through Epstein himself; that's how close they are.

Speaking of bought media, on numerous occasions over the years Gates bribed NPR (we covered that several times before). Now NPR is a megaphone of Microsoft with its truly hypocritical and laughable statements [1, 2]. PR or NPR? Follow Bill's money.

We're supposed to think Microsoft is some sort of moralistic company or ethical authority. That's what NPR basically tells us, having received untold millions from Bill Gates through his so-called 'charity'. This sort of reputation laundering is why the Saudis, Epstein and Gates pay all sorts of institutions. That's nothing new. They know what they pay for. Microsoft loves being Microsoft. This attracts the world's worst offenders because they love working for a company that is above the law because of "connections" (it's still bribing officials).

"A lot is being gained here by Microsoft; they're shaming GNU developers by association -- as it to imply that by contributing to GNU they engage in pedophilia -- in the same way that Torvalds was shamed in the media a year ago until he took a month-long break."When the corporate media wants to paint Stallman as a criminal (by innuendo, citing personal E-mails) it can ignore much bigger things, such as the above. As one reader put it, there are quotas for writers per topic, so when they focus on Stallman they can excuse not covering similar stories about Gates and MIT. As we noted here recently, citing another reader who is deeply familiar with Microsoft, media companies seem to be deflecting to Google in order to distract from Microsoft's vastly worse abuses of the same kind. Suffice to say, we don't mean to insinuate an elaborate 'conspiracy'. Nothing is intended to suggest some Gates-coordinated campaign against Stallman (it all started with a blog post actually); the way the media picks it up, however, is a tad interesting. Even Fox News picked it up over the weekend and it put Stallman's face at the forefront (Fox is owned by a close friend of Gates, Mr. Rupert Murdoch).

"Torvalds hasn't been the same since."A lot is being gained here by Microsoft; they're shaming GNU developers by association -- as it to imply that by contributing to GNU they engage in pedophilia -- in the same way that Torvalds was shamed in the media a year ago until he took a month-long break. Thinly-veiled accusations from self-professed feminists started it. Need we add that the person who calls for removal of Stallman is the same person who did this to Torvalds half a decade ago (piggybacking those very same feminists)? Torvalds hasn't been the same since. He's weak. He has been quiet since then; he's not allowed to criticise anything without huge backlash. In that sense, he lost a lot of his authority over his own project. Microsoft is happy to take advantage [1, 2]. Torvalds has not even expressed an opinion on exFAT. Radio silence. Linux is becoming Windows in file systems space (Torvalds used to bemoan those things, e.g. case-insensitive filesystems). Nothing to see here, move along...

The main filesystems maintainer of Linux has already been slandered as "rape apologist" by the same person (as above). He did object to exFAT, even on the mailing lists. It rests on facts, not bigotry. It's about law and technicality. There's a growing push in various YouTube channels, readers have told us, to remove both Stallman and Torvalds (founders of GNU and Linux, respectively). Rendering them invisibles (from the public scene). If that happens, the effect will be devastating. For morale, for leadership, for identity...

We know who wishes to take their place or replace them. It's not hard to see. Their agenda is a matter of public record. ⬆