The Three-Fold Assault on Freedom in the West, Parts 1 and 2

The three-fold assault on freedom in the West, Part 1

 

PETER MCILVENNA

IN the UK and throughout Europe we face three huge threats to our ability to speak freely: growing censorship, intrusive surveillance and militant Islam that thrives in this environment.

Censorship is on many people’s radars but surveillance and Islam, which in turn depend on a culture of political censorship, are also serious threats to our freedoms which are not getting the attention they need.

Censorship, the enemy of free speech and privacy is the means to control every area of our lives. Europe and the UK have fallen into a new era of totalitarianism, characterised by the words that cannot be uttered under the law.  Hate speech, censorship’s emissary, is a concept forced on us under two guises, presented as ‘ideals’:

● Diversity, Equity and Inclusion

● Multiculturalism

They in turn are the latest manifestations of the cultural Marxism which has long since taken hold of our institutions and removed truth as the standard and replaced it with moral relativism and subjective falsities. The right to offend is no longer a right but a threat to the new world order. Diktats are to be followed and not questioned or discussed.

Just look at the covid tyranny. Divide and conquer was used to full effect. Them and us. The vaxxed and the unvaxxed. Fear is a powerful motivator. And people are sheep-like. They want to be part of the crowd. Not to be different; to be liked not disapproved of. In the USA the rise of MAGA has given new confidence and boldness to ordinary Americans, and in fact citizens across the world, to speak up and challenge the regime consensus.

We also see how blind obedience is rewarded with a better social credit score. Dissent can kill everything that is taken for granted as well as a career or your capacity to earn money. And this blends into surveillance.

Frank Gaffney, the American Defence Policy analyst, has been sounding the alarm on this for years: on the threat we all face from the Chinese Communist Party (and more recently from the WHO). Diversity of views and privately owned media were eliminated in China in 1949 when the CCP took control and brought freedom of thought to a complete end. Western governments have longed for this level of control of their citizens. And technology has given it to them. It has given governments and quasi governmental organisations the power to monitor and report as never before in society. Setting up a reporting group of informers to feed a Ministry of State Security by spying on neighbours and family (as happened in Eastern Europe behind the Iron Curtain) is no longer needed. Our phones do this automatically and they will be part of our downfall. So while we continue to go through the motions of democracy, the dice are already set and the odds are not in our favour.

Take a headline in the Wall Street JournalZuckerberg’s Grand Vision: Most of Your Friends Will Be AI. Meta’s CEO is promoting a future where artificial intelligence is increasingly intertwined with people’s lives.’Meta will cure loneliness by providing AI chat bots as friends, he promises.

It is a horrifying future vision for humanity. Our new AI friends will not only keep an eye on us (surveillance) but I guarantee you they will also report back to Facebook if we say anything problematic and black-mark us, ban or deplatform us (censorship). Just as we have seen with Alexa or OK Google, everything is recorded. ‘For our safety’ of course.  Duplicitous ‘newspeak’ is no longer a concept in a novel written by George Orwell 75 years ago. It is government policy and an entrenched part of the political culture.

The latest and most brutal clampdown on freedom of speech came  last summer when the new far-left government responded to an uprising against mass immigration which followed the barbaric murder of three small girls by a Islamist. It was swiftly crushed in echoes of the totalitarian regimes we fought in the past.

What was unique to the UK was the sheer blatancy of Keir Starmer’s vengeance. It stands as a warning to all Americans. The censorship and control rolled out in the UK is being adapted across Europe. President Trump has a battle on his hands to hold back the tide of Western governments controlling what speech and thoughts are allowed to exist. Take the case of Dr Robert Malone. He was listed as one of the ‘Disinformation Dozen’ by a quasi governmental organisation, Centre for Combating Digital Hate, based in the UK.

Misinformation and disinformation, terms that suddenly appeared, are the means used by the Government, its agencies (chief of which is Ofcom) and the social media tech companies nominally to keep us all ‘safe’ from ‘hate speech’ and ‘wrong thinking’. In fact they are to set confines over what we can communicate. Government has become the chief arbitrator of truth. Not the Bible but our Government. The abandonment of truth that censorship is has created the vacuum in which Islam has flourished, not just in the UK but across Europe.

In the Bible, John 18 describes Jesus’s trial with Pontius Pilate which arrives at one of the most important questions for our age now.

37 ‘You are a king, then!’ said Pilate.

Jesus answered, ‘You say that I am a king. In fact, the reason I was born and came into the world is to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me.’

38 ‘Truth. What is truth?’ retorted Pilate.

What is Truth? Previous generations have been able to answer this. Jesus, who is Truth, has been the foundation for our societies and culture across Western civilisation. But now instead of knowing what truth, absolute truth, is, ‘truth’ has collapsed into meaningless and dangerous subjectivity. Your truth may be different from my truth.

It is this rejection of moral absolutes which has opened the door to governments defining what is right or wrong through censorship and criminalisation, and allowed a confident and aggressive ideology called Islam to flourish. In fact my Prime Minister Two-Tier Keir remained confused about what a woman was until the UK Supreme Court ruled a woman is someone who was born female and a man is someone who is born male. We did not need a Supreme Court ruling for that piece of truth. All we needed was Genesis 1 and 2.

Part 2 follows tomorrow and focuses on the rise of hate crime

Peter is the co-founder and host of the Hearts of Oak podcast http://x.com/HeartsofOakUK, a populist free speech alliance that has three shows a week with an audience of 120,000 per show and now streams on Steve Bannon’s WarRoom.


This article (The three-fold assault on freedom in the West, Part 1) was created and published by Conservative Woman and is republished here under “Fair Use” with attribution to the author Peter Mcilvenna

See Part 2 Below

The three-fold assault on freedom in the West, Part 2

 

PETER MCILVENNA

THE long march through the institutions in the UK began back in the 60s when the left began to take control of our teaching unions, schools and universities. The education of our children was paramount to the far left but largely ignored by ‘conservatives’. As a result the left were extremely successful in capturing our institutions of learning. As these children grew up and took over the key establishment institutions – the civil service, the judiciary, business, finance and medicine as well as throughout education – they began to roll out a second phase of the Marxist cultural wars without a drop of blood spilt, first through a policy of ‘inclusion’ dreamt up in by the Blair administration, which was later to develop into the ‘Diversity Equity and Inclusion’ requirement – to be ignored at your peril. It’s because of this comprehensive attack on our children that organisations like Moms for Liberty in the US are an essential part of this fight for freedoms. It has been of crucial importance for years now that conservatives in the UK reclaim teacher training colleges. Tragically they have been asleep at the wheel. Michael Gove’s education reform ignored what was most critical. The rot began to set in, however, during the preceding Conservative administration under John Major (1990-7) when speech started to be criminalised through the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act of 1994, legislation that made it an offence to cause alarm or distress in certain circumstances, including use of abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or speech that incited violence or hatred.

A later amendment allowed prosecutors to apply for an uplift in sentence for those convicted of hate speech interpreted as targeting ‘individuals or groups based on their race, religion, or other characteristics’. It meant that any crime could be prosecuted as a hate crime if the offender has ‘demonstrated (or been motivated by) hostility based on race, religion, disability, sexual orientation or transgender identity’.

In the UK not only do we have this new criminal class of ‘hate speech’ but we have an even more sinister system. In 2014, the College of Policing came up with the concept of the ‘non-crime hate incident’ (NCHI). This is any incident perceived by the victim or any bystanders to be motivated by hostility or prejudice to the victim based on a ‘protected’ characteristic (race or perceived race, religion or perceived religion, and so on).

‘Perceived’ is the operative word here, since as the guidance goes on to note: ‘The victim does not have to justify or provide evidence of their belief, and police officers or staff should not directly challenge this perception. Evidence of the hostility is not required.’ So you no longer have to commit a crime. All you have to do is have a thought or desire or (imputed) motivation that may lead to a crime in the future.

The recording threshold for a NCHI is that someone had taken a subjective offence to something perfectly lawful that someone else has said or posted online, whether it’s directed at them or not.

It is estimated that more than 250,000 NCHIs have been recorded by police forces in England and Wales. The public have no access to this database and individuals are not informed if and when their name is included and for what. But this black mark categorises them as a hateful individual and can destroy any career opportunity. Offence ‘archaeology’ is a favourite pastime of the left. I am sure that the UK is not unique in having a hidden database with problem people that the government is targeting.

The problem is that conservatives, whether in the US or in the UK or any country, are generally nowhere near as passionate about preserving our liberty as the left are about destroying it. Whether the issue is Islam or abortion, a ‘call’ I have often heard is ‘we need to be more passionate about life than they are about death’. We do. But to date conservatives have not been. They’ve been naive and blind and full of wishful thinking. They don’t want to look old-fashioned, bigoted or narrow as the left casts them, that ‘progressivism’ must be acceded to. Only with the combination of the covid tyranny and the return of Trump have some people begun to wake up. (Though dissenting websites like TCW which challenged the government narrative were demonetised, and still are, on grounds of covid misinformation and other ‘thought’ crimes.)

The State’s monitoring tentacles do not restrict themselves to the spoken word. In the UK and Europe they cover comments and statements online as well. The UK’s Online Safety Act, 300 pages and five years in the making which came into force in March, criminalises speech online under the guise of protecting children from damaging content. Europe’s Digital Services Act (DSA) was introduced weeks after the UK’s Act.

Under both of these a social media company can be fined up to 10 per cent of their global annual turnover so it is no wonder that Meta (Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp), Wikipedia, Telegram and others have indicated they may have to pull out of the UK and Europe. Only last month the video platform Bitchute and social media company Gab blocked access to all UK users.

Paul Durov, founder of Telegram, was arrested in France last year. If President Macron does only what he is told by Nato or the US, as is widely believed, this arrest was not a French attack on freedom to communicate but a global war on speech.

Last year the Australian government pulled its misinformation Bill but immediately introduced a new Bill that aims to ban social media for children under 16 and proposed massive fines for social media platforms for systemic breaches. Australia plans to trial an age-verification system that may include biometrics or government identification to enforce a social media age cut-off, some of the toughest controls imposed by any country to date.

In Canada legislation to restrict free speech has failed to progress but under Mark Carney it is expected to be reintroduced.

In America the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) passed the Senate last year with a big majority and is now in the House. Yes, in America with its First Amendment.

In Germany the Alternative for Germany (AfD) has been facing restriction, banning and censorship. Earlier this month the German domestic intelligence agency, the Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV), classified the largest opposition party, the AfD, as ‘confirmed right-wing extremist’ – a long planned upgrade based on a mysterious 1,100-page assessment, full of damning ‘proofs’ that allegedly supported it. According to blogger eugyppius, ‘It was supposed to prove, in excruciating detail, why the AfD are so evil and so fascist and so Nazi and so Hitler, and in this way make a preliminary case for banning the party.’ However its contents turned out to be ‘such an arrant joke’ that ‘it sapped all remaining momentum within the German political class to prohibit the AfD.’

Thankfully the legal case has collapsed against the AfD, but the ‘cartel’ parties continue their dirty tricks undeterred. The AfD is the party that is polling top, the leading political party in Germany that they tried to ban. If an election were called today they would come first.

As we have seen, the Romanian elections were first cancelled and then, when conducted anew, an EU puppet was manoeuvred in to beat the popular candidate in an election marked by skulduggery. Where the US deep state failed with its lawfare against Donald Trump, the French State has had no compunction in disqualifying the bearers of opinions it finds objectionable – namely Marine Le Pen, who has not just been banned from standing for the third time for the French presidency, she has also been sentenced to two years in prison (though she will be fitted with a tag and kept under ‘house arrest’) with another two years suspended. Meanwhile the winning party in the Austrian elections, the Freedom Party, was not allowed to be the government. A five-month effort to form a coalition government ended when three other parties joined forces and excluded the People’s Party.

In the UK Keir Starmer was returned on a lower vote (9.7million) and share (33.8 per cent) of any modern Prime Minister. The ‘riots’ that occurred not long after he was elected were sparked off by the unspeakably savage murder of three little girls in Southport by someone who was suspected to be an immigrant and turned out to be the son of Rwandan immigrants.

Under Starmer’s swift justice instruction the authorities arrested more than 1,000 people following a week of protests sparked by anger over uncontrolled immigration, which some believe was fuelled by infiltrators. Of course any violence should be prosecuted, lawless behaviour and actual incitement to violence not tolerated. But many of the protests were peaceful, and where was the on-the-ground reporting of organised and threatening counter-demonstrations? Many of those arrested had posted on social media, like Lucy Connolly, who was jailed for 31 months. Her appeal has been denied.

The Labour government announced that up to 5,000 prisoners would be released early to free space for all these keyboard warriors.

Since Southport there has been no diminution in hate speech arrests. Thirty arrests a day are made for hurty words online.

To be concluded.


This article (The three-fold assault on freedom in the West, Part 2) was created and published by Conservative Woman and is republished here under “Fair Use” with attribution to the author Peter Mcilvenna

••••

The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)

••••

Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.

••••

Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

••••

Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*