+- RichieAllen.co.uk Forum (https://forums.richieallen.co.uk)
+-- Forum: Community (https://forums.richieallen.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: General Discussion (https://forums.richieallen.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Thread: Free Speech (/showthread.php?tid=394)
RE: Free Speech - awakened53 - 12-24-2022
Why is it Okay to be Offensive if You’re Left-Wing? Because the fake ‘Left’ has been hijacked by the Cult via Wokers. Say what the Cult wants – no problem. Say what it doesn’t – BAN THEM! Simple, really
Ross Clark has written a brilliant piece for the Daily Mail pointing out the double standards of the people currently demanding Jeremy Clarkson be fired from all his jobs for ‘hate speech’. We never hear a squeak out of Chris Packham, Ayesha Hazarika, Carol Vorderman et al when people on the left say equally nasty things about people they don’t like.
The backlash against Clarkson has also highlighted the monumental and ceaseless hypocrisy of the Left.
For while its commentators, politicians and Twitter warriors erupt into outrage at a columnist in a Conservative newspaper, the truth is that the Left has its own despicable record of making horrible remarks, some of which might be said to verge on incitement to violence.
I am not in any way trying to excuse Clarkson — just pointing out that many of the voices now demanding his head will have been conspicuously silent over even viler comments from the Left.
When they cause offence, they rarely seem to pay a price or even apologise. Different standards seem to apply.
As evidence, here the Mail presents just a small selection of egregious remarks made by Left-wing figures in recent years — and examines what happened afterwards…
ACID REMARKS ABOUT FARAGE
During Britain’s last round of European Parliament elections in 2019, Nigel Farage, then leader of the Brexit Party, had a milkshake thrown over him.
A few days later, comedian Jo Brand said on the Radio 4 programme Heresy: “Why bother with a milkshake when you could get some battery acid.” She followed up her remark by saying: “That’s just me. I’m not going to do it. It’s purely a fantasy, but I think milkshakes are pathetic, I honestly do, sorry.”
In spite of acid attacks being a very serious problem, and the murder of Labour MP Jo Cox three years earlier, the BBC refused to apologise for broadcasting Brand’s comments, saying they were made on a “deliberately provocative” show.
A ‘BAD END’ FOR BORIS
This week, children’s author Sir Philip Pullman described Clarkson’s column as “poison”. Yet in 2019, when the debate over the Brexit Withdrawal Bill was reaching its heated climax, Sir Philip weighed in by tweeting: “When I hear the name ‘‘Boris Johnson’’, for some reason the words ‘rope’ and ‘nearest lamp-post’ come to mind as well.”
Read More: Why is it Okay to be Offensive if You’re Left-Wing?
RE: Free Speech - Steve - 01-05-2023
UK woman arrested for praying silently in public
INSANE: British cops arrest woman for praying silently
Christian persecution is here.
At this point, Britain isn’t turning into clown land. It is turning into a dictatorship where free speech and freedom of religion is completely gone.
What you are about to read should shock anyone who values freedom to their core.
A Christian woman who is a charity worker was standing on a public sidewalk doing absolutely nothing illegal when the police showed up wanting to know why she was standing there.
She told them that she was standing there because there was an abortion clinic nearby. She was not protesting or holding any sign. She was not engaging with anyone. She was completely silent. She was merely standing on a public sidewalk close to an abortion clinic.
For the rest of this article please go to source link below.
Video can be accessed at source link below.
https://nexusnewsfeed.com/article/geopolitics/uk-woman-arrested-for-praying-silently-in-public/
https://petersweden.substack.com/p/arrested-praying-silently
RE: Free Speech - awakened53 - 02-01-2023
77th Brigade Exposed: The Secretive UK Military Unit spying on YOU if you can see through the lies
[b]Secretive Whitehall units have been monitoring government critics’ speech online – including Members of Parliament, academics, journalists, human rights campaigners and the public – under the guise of combatting “misinformation.”[/b]
In their report released yesterday titled ‘Ministry of Truth: the secretive government units spying on your speech’, Big Brother Watch reveals the truth behind the UK government’s five anti-fake news units and how their mission of “countering disinformation” has quickly turned into countering dissent across the UK.
The report also exposes the Government’s use of the British Army to scan their own citizens’ speech online, with exclusive testimony from a whistle-blower who worked in the “secretive information warfare machine”, the 77th Brigade. One of the key findings of the report states:
“Soldiers from the Army’s 77th Brigade, tasked with ‘non-lethal psychological warfare’, collected tweets from British citizens posting about Covid-19 and passed them to central government – despite claiming operations were directed strictly overseas.”
Last summer, we worked with Big Brother Watch to determine the extent of the government’s spying activities. As a result, Carl sent Freedom of Information requests to The Rapid Response Unit and the Counter Disinformation Unit (see the report for context).
The Rapid Response Unit (“RRU”) is part of the Cabinet Office and was tasked with “tackling a range of harmful narratives online” during the pandemic, “from purported ‘experts’ issuing dangerous misinformation to criminal fraudsters running phishing scams.”
The Counter Disinformation Unit (“CDU”) was tasked to monitor what it deems to be disinformation and flag content to social media companies, sitting inside the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport.
![[Image: Screenshot-2023-01-31-at-21.15.37-500x295.png]](https://davidicke.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Screenshot-2023-01-31-at-21.15.37-500x295.png)
We’ve previously written about ‘Censorships and their Antidotes’ in Covid Times, pointing out that “academic and Journalistic freedom requires individuals to pursue knowledge wherever it may lead without undue or unreasonable interference.”
In our article ‘Dissenters’, we learnt from Isobel Oakeshott that attacks were partly orchestrated by Hancock, who harnessed the full power of the state to silence “dissenters.”
This latest Big Brother Watch report, and the information obtained in Freedom Of Information requests, show the government was spying on many individuals, including us.
All along, the government was taking covert action to shout down what it considered was misinformation and disinformation: the government thought it owned the truth. It didn’t like criticism of modelling, and lockdown policies, particularly pointing out the collateral harms, any opposition to covid passes, vaccine passports and evidence underpinning the vaccines.
[b]Read More: 77th Brigade Exposed: The Secretive UK Military Unit spying on YOU if you can see through the lies[/b]
RE: Free Speech - Steve - 02-05-2023
YouTube and Vimeo Censorship of 2023 – Rise of the Earth Alliance
WRITTEN BY DR MICHAEL SALLA ON FEBRUARY 5, 2023. POSTED IN EXOPOLITICS RESEARCH, FEATURED
[/url]
On Thursday morning, I uploaded the video trailer to my upcoming [url=https://exopolitics.org/whats-coming-in-2023-global-revolution-ssp-et-disclosure/]webinar on February 18 to YouTube and later to Vimeo. The trailer is titled “2023 – Rise of the Earth Alliance” and was scheduled for release on Saturday morning. The trailer covers how the Deep State’s planetary control agenda is increasingly being exposed by dedicated truth tellers around the world, and how this will facilitate major disclosures in 2023 about secret space programs, flourishing undersea and underground cities, artifacts from ancient civilizations, and visiting extraterrestrial life. However, YouTube and Vimeo viewed the trailer as harmful conspiracy theory glorifying and inciting violence and took it down. Here’s what happened.
At 11:47 am, a few hours after uploading it, I got a rude shock when I received the following message from YouTube: …
https://exopolitics.org/youtube-and-vimeo-censorship-of-2023-rise-of-the-earth-alliance/
‘In my view, YouTube and Vimeo’s removal of “2023 – The Rise of the Earth Alliance” has less to do with preventing harmful conspiracy theories but more to do with providing cover for a Deep State behind a myriad of issues discussed in the trailer, including an extraterrestrial coverup’
Available here - https://rumble.com/v28343y-2023-rise-of-the-earth-alliance.html
https://www.bitchute.com/video/DT8swyLYTqFU/
https://odysee.com/@ExopoliticsToday:d/Trailer-Feb-2023:8
RE: Free Speech - Steve - 03-16-2023
Twitter - https://twitter.com/bbgrichie/status/1636286391557529600?s=21
Free Speech Under Attack
Freelance journalists & independent content creators will soon be banned from using telecommunications applications such as Zoom and Skype. It happened to me last night. I explain all in this video. Please watch and share widely.
RE: Free Speech - awakened53 - 05-11-2023
Know Thy Enemy: Top 50 Players of the Censorship-Industrial Complex Revealed
POSTED BY RICHARD WILLETT - MEMES AND HEADLINE COMMENTS BY DAVID ICKEPOSTED ON 11 MAY 2023
Know Thy Enemy: Top 50 Players of the Censorship-Industrial Complex Revealed
![[Image: censored-2.jpg]](https://davidicke.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/censored-2.jpg)
[b]An in-depth report by journalist Matt Taibbi reveals the extent of a bureaucracy known as the Censorship Industrial Complex, a new system of control in the domain of “hybrid warfare.”[/b]
Taibbi is one of the main publishers of the Twitter Files, which revealed how Twitter worked with a constellation of government, corporate, journalistic, and NGO entities to control narratives and information.
In a new report, Taibbi lists in great detail the Top 50 organizations that comprise the Censorship-Industrial Complex (CIC), which include intelligence agencies, top globalist institutions, corporations, far-left think tanks, and liberal “fact-checkers.”
![[Image: Screenshot-2023-05-10-at-20.41.51-500x336.png]](https://davidicke.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Screenshot-2023-05-10-at-20.41.51-500x336.png)
Specifically, the CIC is categorized into seven groups: Government entities, Foundations, Big Tech, For-Profit disinformation companies, Academic Initiatives, Think Tanks, “Fact-Checkers,” and Non-Governmental Organizations.
Taibbi claimed the groundwork for the CIC was laid during the years-long Russia collusion hoax weaponized by the Deep State to destroy Donald Trump.
“This is why the Trump-Russia scandal in the United States will likely be remembered as a crucial moment in 21st-century history, even though the investigation superficially ended a non-story, fake news in itself,” he wrote.
“What the Mueller investigation didn’t accomplish in ousting Trump from office, it did accomplish in birthing a vast new public-private bureaucracy devoted to stopping ‘mis-, dis-, and malinformation,’ while smoothing public acquiescence to the emergence of a spate of new government agencies with ‘information warfare’ missions.”
He went on to say the social media “de-platforming” of Infowars founder Alex Jones in 2018 was just the tip of the iceberg of the CIC system.
[b]Read More: Know Thy Enemy: Top 50 Players of the Censorship-Industrial Complex Revealed[
RE: Free Speech - Steve - 05-27-2023
Live from Glasgow -Robess … https://www.facebook.com/robert.sproul.16/videos/205241355297380/?
RE: Free Speech - awakened53 - 06-02-2023
Government’s Free Speech Champion: “I’ll Defend All Views.”
The Government has confirmed that Arif Ahmed, a Cambridge professor of philosophy, will be the new Director for Freedom of Speech and Academic Freedom at the Office for Students, a position created by the new Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act. The Times has more.
Quote:Universities face “urgent threats to free speech and academic freedom”, Arif Ahmed, the government’s new freedom of speech champion has said.
Ahmed pledged to use his new role to stand up for “all views”, adding that he was not in the role to join in any culture war nor promote the views of the Government.
The Cambridge professor is the first to fill the job, which was announced by the Department for Education (DfE) in 2021 as part of the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Bill.
As well as championing freedom of expression on campus, Ahmed will be responsible for investigating any infringements of the duties placed on universities to promote freedom of speech.
The bill, which became law on May 11th, also includes a new complaints scheme which could result in sanctions for universities that do not uphold freedom of speech within the law.
Ahmed said failures could include no-platforming external speakers, enforcing “ideological” bias training for staff and students, and disciplining lecturers for their social media activity.
The DfE has also suggested that universities that use non-disclosure agreements against staff or students who report bullying or abuse could be affected by the bill.
A blogpost by the DfE said: “Students, staff and visiting speakers will be able to bring claims to court if they feel they have suffered loss as a result of their free speech rights being unlawfully restricted.”
The complaints scheme has not yet been finalised and the government is still drawing up regulation to enact the bill. When implemented, it is expected to be administered by the Office for Students (OfS) — the independent regulator of higher education in England. Ahmed will become a member of the board of the OfS.
Read More: Government’s Free Speech Champion: “I’ll Defend All Views.”
RE: Free Speech - awakened53 - 06-07-2023
The Sound of Silence: Law Enforcement’s Role in Curtailing Free Speech
Introduced in April 2019, the Online Harms White Paper outlined the UK government’s plan to make the UK “the safest place in the world to be online.”
The proposal recommends establishing a new independent regulator for social media sites, platforms, and other online services.
Companies would be legally required to take action against a defined set of online harms, ranging from illegal activity and content to behaviors that are harmful but not necessarily illegal.
While protecting users, particularly children, from online harm is paramount, critics argue that the White Paper’s language is vague and extremely suppressive.
For example, one provision addresses “disinformation” and “fake news” without providing a clear definition for these terms, leading to worries that it could be manipulated to curtail free speech.
Countering Extremism:
The 2015 Counter-Terrorism and Security Act is another significant piece of legislation.
Under the Act, public bodies have the legal duty to prevent people from being drawn into terrorism, a policy known as the Prevent duty.
While it is undoubtedly vital to protect national security, this law’s implementation has raised concerns about its impact on free speech, particularly within educational institutions.
There have been numerous instances where schools and universities have been accused of overzealous application of this duty, thereby inhibiting lawful discussion and debate.
For instance, in 2015, a postgraduate student at the University of Reading was reported to the university’s security team for reading an academic textbook on terrorism for his course in the library, highlighting the potential for the Prevent duty to limit academic freedom.
Police & Courts:
There have been several high-profile instances in the UK where the police or courts have been accused of curtailing free speech. One example that sparked significant debate concerns the case of Mark Meechan, more commonly known by his YouTube alias, Count Dankula.
In 2018, Meechan was convicted by a Scottish court of being “grossly offensive,” a violation of the Communications Act 2003, for a video he posted on YouTube.
In the video, he trained his girlfriend’s pug to raise its paw in response to phrases such as “Sieg Heil” and “gas the Jews.”
Meechan claimed the video was a joke intended to annoy his girlfriend, but the court questionably found the content went beyond the boundaries of free speech and could incite hatred.
The case sparked significant controversy and debate.
Critics of the court’s decision argued that, while the video might have been offensive to some, Meechan’s right to freedom of speech should have protected his ability to make the video without facing legal consequences.
Supporters of the decision, however, argued that the potential for the video to incite anti-Semitic hatred meant it was appropriate for the court to take action.
This case serves as a reminder of the tension between the right to free speech and the responsibility to prevent hate speech that exists in many democracies today.
It also highlights the ongoing frightening debates about how to regulate speech in an increasingly digital world, where content can quickly reach a global audience.
British libel laws have a long history of being exploited to stifle free speech. In the UK, the burden of proof traditionally falls on the defendant, meaning that they are guilty until proven innocent.
This can lead to a ‘chilling effect’, where people are deterred from speaking out due to the risk of costly legal battles.
A notable example is Dr. Peter Wilmshurst, a British cardiologist who was sued for libel by medical device company NMT Medical in 2007.
Wilmshurst had publicly raised concerns about the efficacy and safety of one of the company’s heart devices.
The case, which lasted for several years and nearly bankrupted Wilmshurst, highlighted the potential for British libel laws to inhibit open scientific discussion and criticism that is in the public interest.
While there have been reforms to UK libel laws in the last decade, including the Defamation Act 2013, concerns remain that these laws can still be used to suppress free speech.
Read More: The Sound of Silence: Law Enforcement’s Role in Curtailing Free Speech
RE: Free Speech - awakened53 - 06-14-2023
Secretive Government Unit Broke Own Rules by Flagging Opinions as ‘Disinformation’
A secretive unit that has been monitoring lockdown critics broke the Government’s own rules. The Telegraph has more.
Last week, the Telegraph disclosed that the Counter-Disinformation Unit collected social media posts that were critical of Government Covid policies, including the decision to close schools and the debate over the mass vaccination of children.
It can now be revealed that this unit ignored official Cabinet Office guidance created for civil servants and communications professionals when it classified legitimate opinions as disinformation.
A manual titled ‘Resist 2: Countering Disinformation Toolkit’ was produced by the Government Communication Service in 2021 and is intended as an aid for civil servants and communications professionals to identify misinformation – false information that is inadvertently spread – and disinformation – false information that is spread deliberately.
In a section that seeks to explain how to spot disinformation, readers are warned that opinions should not be considered as such.
Despite this instruction, it appears that social media posts where people expressed concerns about government Covid policies were monitored by the secretive unit.
The manual states: “The most common way to first notice mis- and disinformation is when you encounter messages that draw your attention and raise concerns.
“A message is a form of communication aimed at a group of recipients. It may for example take the form of a social media post, tweet, meme, or comment, or a letter, flyer, poster, or slogan.
“Is the message an opinion? Opinions are usually subjective, which means that they cannot be verifiably false. If the message is simply a statement of opinion, you should not treat it as disinformation.
“However, if the opinion is based on verifiably false, deceptive, or manipulated information that has the potential to cause harm, it may be worth investigating further.”
Molly Kingsley, a former lawyer and journalist who founded the children’s campaign group UsForThem, was one of the people who posted opinions critical of government policy and later discovered some of her posts were collected in reports sent to the CDU.
She said: “This is very sinister. It shows that they were materially extending the remit of what they were meant to be doing and weren’t following the guidelines.
“It becomes state censorship or at the very least, flagging opinions which are unpalatable for the government. This is not what is supposed to happen in a free democracy.
“The opinions I and others expressed were about ethics and morality, almost like conscientious objections. Who did they think they were to be flagging that?”
One legitimate opinion that was marked for the CDU’s attention was a tweet from journalist Julia Hartley-Brewer raising concerns about the collateral damage lockdowns can cause.
She wrote: “Another personal experience of the damage lockdown causes from a @talkradio listener. Her fiancé’s business is closed down, her father’s cancer treatment cancelled and her grandma is scared to even leave her home. This lockdown is a national tragedy way beyond Covid deaths.”
Read More: Secretive Government Unit Broke Own Rules