Scroll down to read this post.


Please consider supporting my work here at Behind The Black by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, in any one of the following ways:


1. Zelle: This is the only internet method that charges no fees. All you have to do is use the Zelle link at your internet bank and give my name and email address (zimmerman at nasw dot org). What you donate is what I get.


2. Patreon: Go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation.

3. A Paypal Donation:

4. A Paypal subscription:

5. Donate by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman and mailed to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652

Today’s blacklisted Americans: 30,000 videos banned by YouTube for stating COVID conclusions that disagree with health authorities


They’re coming for you next: Google’s YouTube has now blacklisted more than 30,000 videos simply because they stated conclusions relating to COVID-19 vaccines that either contradicted or challenged opinions or conclusions held by the World Health Organization or other governmental health authorities.

The headline is only listing the videos removed by YouTube because they state conclusions relating to various coronavirus vaccines that YouTube disagrees with. It turns out this is only the tip of the iceberg.

Since February 2020, YouTube has removed more than 800,000 videos containing coronavirus misinformation, the videos are first flagged by the company’s AI or a human reviewer. The videos are then sent for another level of review before a decision is made on whether or not to remove them.

Videos that violate YouTube’s policy relating to misinformation about vaccines include those that contradict expert consensus on the vaccines from health authorities or the World Health Organization. [emphasis mine]

I have reported on this fascist policy by Google in an earlier blacklist post, but did so then only in the context of one organization banned. It bears repeating because the banning has now become so widespread.

Google’s policy here is illustrative of the dark age we are now entering. Just because government authorities such a WHO have an opinion or conclusion concerning COVID does not mean it is the truth and that all other opinions and conclusions are thus “misinformation” and must be banned. That is not how the scientific method works. Proper research considers openly and without fear all conclusions, sifts through them, and allows the data to determine which work best.

Banning conclusions you don’t like merely prevents you from seeing all sides of an issue. It is authoritarianism at its worst, and defeats the whole purpose of science, which is to search for truth wherever it leads.

More important, it signals a close-mindedness and willful ignorance that can only lead to more close-mindness and more ignorance. Thus, the dark age arrives.

Enjoy cowering in your cavelike basements wearing muzzles and afraid of the thunder. It is what our children have to look forward to unless some adults today start rebelling against these despots.

Sadly, I see little evidence any such rebellion is about to occur. For example, how many of you have actually stopped using Google as your default search engine? Takes less than 30 seconds to switch, yet most people don’t bother, even after being horrified by stories like this.

Conscious Choice cover

Now available in hardback and paperback as well as ebook!


From the press release: In this ground-breaking new history of early America, historian Robert Zimmerman not only exposes the lie behind The New York Times 1619 Project that falsely claims slavery is central to the history of the United States, he also provides profound lessons about the nature of human societies, lessons important for Americans today as well as for all future settlers on Mars and elsewhere in space.

Conscious Choice: The origins of slavery in America and why it matters today and for our future in outer space, is a riveting page-turning story that documents how slavery slowly became pervasive in the southern British colonies of North America, colonies founded by a people and culture that not only did not allow slavery but in every way were hostile to the practice.  
Conscious Choice does more however. In telling the tragic history of the Virginia colony and the rise of slavery there, Zimmerman lays out the proper path for creating healthy societies in places like the Moon and Mars.


“Zimmerman’s ground-breaking history provides every future generation the basic framework for establishing new societies on other worlds. We would be wise to heed what he says.” —Robert Zubrin, founder of founder of the Mars Society.


All editions available at Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and all book vendors. The ebook can be purchased direct from my ebook publisher, ebookit, in which case you don't support the big tech companies and I get a bigger cut much sooner. Note that the price for the ebook, $3.99, goes up to $5.99 on September 1, 2022.


Autographed printed copies are also available at discount directly from me (hardback $24.95; paperback $14.95). Just email me at zimmerman @ nasw dot org.


  • Brian

    So what happens when the WHO reverses itself? Do all the new videos get banned and the old ones reinstated?

  • wayne

    Dr. Jordan Peterson
    “Self-Deception in Psychopathology”
    [Toward a New Understanding of Psychopathology conference, March, 2011]

  • commodude

    WHO doesn’t revers itself or change its propaganda.

    You foolish proles just didn’t understand correctly the first time.

  • Andi

    “We are at war with Eastasia. We have always been at war with Eastasia…”

  • Sayomara

    I’m going to put a plug in for one of the podcasts I enjoy that deconstruct media twice a week. People should be check out No Agenda Podcast. They have been doing a great job talking about how terrible our media has become and calling out the lies we are hearing everyday.

  • pzatchok

    The world needs a new video server. One that does not ban ANY speech.
    Though I can see it catagorizing each video into groups.
    Religious. Any and all religions.
    Rascist. Both anti and pro from any side.
    Politics from any side.

    Leave the kiddie stuff to TicTok

  • @pzatchok

    Have at it.

  • wayne

    Excellent, stuff!

    “Choco rations going up”

  • Col Beausabre

    To play Devil’s Advocate….Assume I publish a conservative magazine. What do I do if aoc (deliberately not capped – She’s no FDR) sends me an article heaping praise on her “green new deal” . Am I obliged to publish it ? I would say no. My publication is privately owned and deliberately espouses a conservative view of the world. To force me to publish it would be to trample on my free speech and property rights. So if Youtube decides that certain postings are not in accord with their editorial view of the world, let them delete those items. Remember that “censorship” is an act of government, not private entities. Now Youtuube may be as hypocritical as all get out by claiming to welcome all opinions when they don’t, but that doesn’t seem to be why it is criticized here.

  • Col Beausabre: 1. YouTube and Google are getting tax benefits by claiming they are a “utility” not a “publisher.” The former means they only provide a platform for everyone to publish on. The latter is what you describe. If they want to be the latter, that tax benefit must be removed.

    2. There presently are no other publishers of videos available comparable to YouTube. They are the government’s state-run press, in that they have a monopoly on publication, and apparently have decided to only publish the government’s perspective.

    3. It is morally wrong to ban in this manner.

  • wayne

    Murray N. Rothbard
    Introduction to Microeconomics
    “Lecture 10: Government Cartels”

  • wayne

    How Five Companies Control All US Media
    (august 2020)

  • This is a prime example of how the hubris of an elite few can effectively unplug the distributed intellect of a nation from problem-solving efforts, by deeming only a subset of that elite few “authoritative” and the only ones worthy of being published on platforms that have a de facto monopoly on said publishing.

    Not to mention that such control of the flow of information, allows Google/YouTube to manipulate the people, to elect the government the manipulators desire. These days, the manipulators don’t need a crystal skull and mind control to get what they want.

  • Cotour


    “Why has not much of anything in modern American politics specifically, made any common sense to you recently? Naked S.O.M is why, leadership is both over confident and they are desperate. Why now, what is the difference now? Technology.”

    “Empowered leadership and their particular flavor of politics, how ever you choose to characterize it, and political agenda is being allied with and buttressed by high tech and Social Media business entities who essentially are in control of the flow of news, information and “The Message”. And those business entities have chosen to actively censor that information and manage who is allowed to participate in distributing information or disagreeing with information and the “Message”.”

  • m d mill

    I agree with Col Beausabre:

    1) RZ is only correct in that they(YouTube Twitter Wikipedia) censor and are propagandistic in nature, thus not an non partisan utility, and thus should not get that tax distinction (and they could live with that).

    2) There are other video distributors of more conservative and “youtube banned” video and content (eg Rumble, Parlor). The fact they are not as big as Youtube is not the fault or responsibility of Youtube. Rush Limbaugh “owned” talk radio for decades…should he have been limited in any way (the liberal/leftists tried to do just that with the same “equal time” argument RZ is using here).
    It is the responsibility of those who are outraged to do better at competing…this is a society of free speech AND responsibility. You do not have the “moral” authority to complain that the opposition private organization is doing a better job than you in their propaganda/communication efforts. As Kennedy said ” Don’t get mad, get even”.
    Monopoly: the exclusive possession or control of the supply of or trade in a commodity or service.
    Any one is free to compete with Youtube Wikipedia Twitter(eg Rumble, Parlor). There is no monopoly of market or product…there is no monopoly.
    They are not “state-run” and do not publish the “government perspective”. They are leftist propagandists of foolish and sometime despicably leftist propaganda, who are sometimes in agreement with the gov, but some times in opposition to the gov.

    3)National Review and The Nation and Youtube and Wikipedia are partisan publications and should be allowed to edit censor and even propagandize as they see fit. Are they immoral for doing so? Certainly not. They have the right to be partisans and even hypocrites.
    RZ tells us to boycott/blacklist Google Youtube Twitter etc based on their partisan objectives, but then tells us it is immoral for private organizations to blacklist/censor based on partisan opinion…we do indeed all have the right to be hypocrites.

  • Cotour

    This made me chuckle: “They are not “state-run” and do not publish the “government perspective”. ”

    And Lois Learner did not to have a conversation with Obama to know what needed to be done either.

  • md mill: I am not telling people to boycott Google/Youtube. I am telling them to should choose other companies in an effort to break their monopolies and encourage competition. If enough do this and these corrupt companies experience pain, they might reform themselves. Otherwise they will continue their bad behavior.

  • Gary

    My oldest daughter’s boyfriend..only 16, asked me if there was a list of Blacklisted articles. He has absolutely no awareness of these issues, but he is willing to read.

  • Gary: As I’ve said, a search of BtB for “Today’s blacklisted” will bring them all up. Here is the link to that search:

  • Cotour

    Just had an interesting interaction with a customer who I know very well and who I have not seen all year, he is a credentialed biologist with a big fat PhD, knew all about the virus and best practices regarding it.

    He came in wearing a mask, I walked out and had none on, so he immediately removed his.

    Which set off a fairly complete discussion about Covid and all of the issues from: Masks being worn outside and insanely by people alone in their own cars, to vitamin D (When I mentioned it out of the blue his eyes lite up), to the government not doing their due diligence in informing the populous properly to the point that they are now morally deficient in their fiduciary responsibilities, to the government manipulating the issue for their own purposes of control, to big pharma and not wanting to promote simple low cost mitigating therapies, to the effectiveness of my fan, to Dr. Fauci and how he is all over the place and is no longer a scientist but is now a politician who tests the wind before he gives his “expert” “scientific” opinion, we went down the entire list, and guess what?

    He agreed with every point that I made, we agreed on everything. I was amazed.

    AND for the cherry on top, he is a very well known environmentalist and a big Liberal (Not a Leftist, a Liberal).

    He in time realized he had had the virus before it was “the virus” because he had been traveling in the subways. He had a sore throat and blew it off, no issues. And he is not young. And in addition he chose to receive the vaccine, which I am choosing not to receive.

    Surprised the hell out of me.

  • Edward

    These bans aren’t so much different from the Pope putting Galileo under house arrest. Galileo had the audacity to suggest that there were moons orbiting Jupiter, but everyone knew and the Church agreed that objects only orbit the Earth. Contradicting the experts or the authorities has long been punished, so why should it be any different now?

    Darwin similarly contradicted well known facts. He suggested such outrageous hypotheses as evolution and survival of the fittest. It is a good thing that he, too, was shut up in favor of the experts, otherwise we might believe such nonsensical hogwash, thinking that viruses could spontaneously change into other, more deadly forms.

    And how could Isaac Newton possibly suggest that things remain in motion without a force keeping them in motion? If this were true, then we wouldn’t need horses to continuously pull our carts. We would just give the cart a push, and off we would go. Use common sense, people; the experts do. Sometimes.

    No. Contradictory opinions or facts must be shut down immediately so that no one gets the idea that the experts might have it all wrong. Once we lose our faith in our experts or the authorities, all hell will break loose, and the stuff will hit the fan.

    Sticking to the old ways and the old knowledge is the only way for science to make strides forward, otherwise we might discover that everything that we hold to be true and good is malarky and bad, possibly setting science back decades or centuries. Aristotle, an early expert authority, was obviously right, that heavier objects, such as hammers, fall faster than lighter objects, such as feathers. At least here on Earth — it works differently in other parts of the universe, such as the Moon, where Apollo 15 demonstrated they fall at the same rate.

    How dare anyone question authority? Next thing we know, someone will say that we can trust people over thirty years old.

    Or am I being too sarcastic — er — cynical?

  • wayne

    –> obama’s Amerika….

    All Hail the Messiah

  • Cotour

    Using “Higher” and very expensive and “woke” education and the power of the state and city during a declared Covid national emergency to facilitate the custody of a child from one parent to the other. (Keeping in mind no one knows anything about this particular case other than what is being presented)

    “The mother explained that the school nurse had came out and was aggressively demanding that she put on a mask, but she was already leaving and did not accept it. “The next thing I know, my daughter is taken away from me,”

    “Dr. Epstein is separated from her daughter’s father and they had a shared custody agreement where the child split times between the home equally. The divorce, however, has been bitter.”

    How low can people go? As low as they have to, pure S.O.M. apparently. This is how ruthless the Left is, and I am assuming that all involved are in that classification. You see it here and you can see it in Congress and the Senate as the Democrats push as far and as hard as they possibly can in destroying the rational rules and laws that exist, all in pursuit of absolute power.

  • Gary


    Thanks again for the link.

  • m d mill

    “md mill: I am not telling people to boycott Google/Youtube. I am telling them to should choose other companies in an effort to break their monopolies and encourage competition. If enough do this and these corrupt companies experience pain, they might reform themselves. Otherwise they will continue their bad behavior.”

    What?? This is the exact definition of one type of boycott!! You are indeed advocating the boycott of Google and Youtube.
    BTW, I am not saying a boycott is right or wrong. But it is then hypocritical to say it is “corrupt” for private organizations to blacklist/censor and propagandize based on partisan objectives….it is simply cheap and cowardly.

    Is it “corrupt” to be a propagandist for a partisan position or ideology. It may be hypocritical to claim otherwise, but it is not corrupt…they have a right to do so. But it is just extremely frustrating to free market libertarians (like you(I believe) and myself) whenever free thought is censored, even within a free private organization. But should we boycott them for exercising their free right to propagandize, specifically when they provide other useful services at no cost, and much better than the competition (this is regrettably true)? Is this hypocritical for a libertarian, in principle? Its a good question. But we certainly have the right to boycott cheap and cowardly propagandists if we so chose, whether it is hypocritical or not. Its your free choice, but I suspect either choice is equally defensible.

    Your chuckle makes no sense to me. Did you read the following sentence?
    “They are not “state-run” and do not publish the “government perspective”. They are LEFTIST [not government] propagandists of foolish and sometime despicably leftist propaganda, who are sometimes in agreement with the gov, but some times in opposition to the gov [such as when Trump was the Administrative Federal gov]. ”
    Do you really disagree with this statement, or are you implying they ARE state run and always publish the “GOVERNMENT” perspective. They are propagandists for the Leftist/Liberal perspective, which may differ from some official gov position. And Lois Learner WAS a gov employee so that example does not pertain to the question, in any way.

  • Cotour


    What is currently underway involving the private and government entities in pushing these clearly Leftist agendas is unacceptable on many levels and it threatens our country.

    Your attempting to draw lines of distinction is irrelevant and dangerous. Private business must be redirected and disciplined by the government that it has essentially taken over and are using their massive social media power to keep dominant in politics. The fox is now in charge of the hen house.

    That is a massive and fundamental problem that threatens our Democratic Republic and no line of distinction will make it more palatable or tolerable. THIS MUST BE RECONCILED.


    “​And both party’s are over time complicit here. Both have surrendered their fiduciary responsibilities regarding these matters of debt and sovereignty in my opinion. Political leadership in America, in their leadership rolls, can forget from where they come and who they are, and what they are tasked to accomplish. Political leadership and aspects of power and S.O.M. can make you forget you are an American.

    Keeping in mind that this is not a new strategy, America has done the same many many times in our history in order to control those who we needed to “own” and control, both physically and politically. This is strategy. The Communist Chinese recognize opportunity and are using “our” move! Although ironically its really all pure “The Art Of War” and, Sun Tzu esque if you ask me. And we should not be so desperate and willfully naive regarding these moves. Ignorance and desperate, willful stupidity is stupidity all the same.

    Warfare takes many different forms and its better to not have to fire a shot if at all possible. And that is how I see what is underway today in our country and the world. “

  • Cotour

    America one year behind the curve? That does not sound rational or reasonable to me.

    “Currently, the adult recommended dietary allowance for vitamin D is 600 to 800 international units (IUs) per day,” said Meltzer. “The National Academy of Medicine has said that taking up to 4,000 IUs per day is safe for the vast majority of people, and risk of hypercalcemia increases at levels over 10,000 IUs per day.”

    One of the challenges of this study is that it is currently difficult to determine exactly how vitamin D may be supporting immune function. “This is an observational study,” said Meltzer. “We can see that there’s an association between vitamin D levels and likelihood of a COVID-19 diagnosis, but we don’t know exactly why that is, or whether these results are due to the vitamin D directly or other related biological factors.”

    High vitamin D levels may protect against COVID-19, especially for Black people | EurekAlert! Science News

    “Statistically significant associations of vitamin D levels with COVID-19 risk were not found in white people.”

    (I am assuming from other European studies that I am aware of that there is also a significant positive effect of elevated Vitamin D and ALL human beings verses Covid19)

Readers: the rules for commenting!


No registration is required. I welcome all opinions, even those that strongly criticize my commentary.


However, name-calling and obscenities will not be tolerated. First time offenders who are new to the site will be warned. Second time offenders or first time offenders who have been here awhile will be suspended for a week. After that, I will ban you. Period.


Note also that first time commenters as well as any comment with more than one link will be placed in moderation for my approval. Be patient, I will get to it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.