Latest attacks on free speech

Historical insights & thoughts about the world we live in - and the social conditioning exerted upon us by past and current propaganda.

Re: Latest attacks on free speech

Postby hoi.polloi on December 27th, 2016, 4:00 am

Fundamental rights might indeed be under attack, SacredCowSlayer.

Cosponsored by the criminally insane political "parties" that are supposed to represent the people's republican form of democratic government:

Boyle, Brendan [D-PA13] (joined May 10, 2016)
Cicilline, David [D-RI1] (joined May 10, 2016)
Fitzpatrick, Michael [R-PA8] (joined May 10, 2016)
Guthrie, Brett [R-KY2] (joined May 10, 2016)
Lamborn, Doug [R-CO5] (joined May 10, 2016)
Lieu, Ted [D-CA33] (joined May 10, 2016)
Lipinski, Daniel [D-IL3] (joined May 10, 2016)
Quigley, Mike [D-IL5] (joined May 10, 2016)
Stefanik, Elise [R-NY21] (joined May 10, 2016)
Takai, Mark [D-HI1] (joined May 10, 2016; no longer serving)
Young, Todd [R-IN9] (joined May 10, 2016)
Moulton, Seth [D-MA6] (joined May 31, 2016)
Israel, Steve [D-NY3] (joined Jul 11, 2016)

... Adam Kinzinger [R-IL] etc.
ad nauseum

H.R. 5181: Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act of 2016 ... 81/summary

Just signed by Obama Christmas Eve Eve, and reportedly including a $611 billion budget for the bloated corporations posing as US "military" ... uh, "interests".

When the hell did Presidents get the "right" to sign into law anything? Executive orders were meant for speeding up inefficiencies and such when laws had been enacted by the people's representatives, not for creating arbitrary suggestions that match the "feel" of Congress. When will this end? How else could it end? The Senate and Congress should certainly try not to get this sort of thing approved.

The NDAA, which already "authorizes" mass drug experiments on the American public and now this — (what "legal" right can the government claim this is, to violate the very principles that US "Security Interests" are supposedly defending? WTF? :blink: ) — may be to blame but someone quite obviously against American interests is in the American military, or else how could they justify this third world law against free speech? It even appears to retroactively "legalize" and "justify" fake news, media fakery or whatever you want to call propaganda and mass lying of the media monopolies. As long as it's somehow countering what is deemed as Russian or Chinese propaganda. Will they call out the Russian and Chinese space programs, perhaps?

Counter-propaganda? Really? In 2016? What is this? Who do you see boasting that Russia is a wonderful place to live that everyone is just clamoring to move to? Who is claiming China is the epitome of fair civilization? Nobody.

I am concerned about what this sort of thing explicitly fails to mention — that is, who will be judging what is crimethink.

Did it all stem from this guy — Murphy, Christopher [D-CT] (joined Jul 14, 2016) — in the move to form S. 3274: Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act? ( ... 74/details) — and why is he so eager to get the Senate on board?

Murphy is also supposedly responsible for helping to pen the Mental Health Reform Acts of 2015 and 2016. ... d-into-law

“Today marks a breakthrough for people with mental illness and their families,” said Murphy. “It was an honor to stand behind President Obama at his final bill signing ceremony and watch him enact the most significant reforms of our mental health system in decades.”

“Mental illness and addiction do not discriminate, so our health care system shouldn’t either. It should be as easy to access a doctor or get prescriptions for an illness of the mind ...

Could it have been some kind of cry for help? :wacko:

Someone put that crowd in a padded cell! Throw Obama in as well!

They are apparently so concerned about Russia and China until you read the sentences like this:

an important element of this strategy should be to protect and promote a free, healthy, and independent press in countries vulnerable to foreign disinformation.


Since America is apparently already not only vulnerable to foreign disinformation but lately (and especially since 9/11) practically running on it, what can be said about this absurd idea that America is now suddenly going to switch to true fact based narratives?

It's good news if only it were true!
Posts: 4994
Joined: November 14th, 2010, 8:24 pm

Re: Latest attacks on free speech

Postby kickstones on June 1st, 2018, 9:30 am

Not sure this the right place, but I came across this interesting story on Zero Hedge by Stefan Molyneux. ... y-robinson

It involves a notorious fellow in the UK who goes by the name of Tommy Robinson. According to Wiki he is a far-right activist who co-founded and served as spokesman and leader of the English Defence League.

Apparently he is in the news because he was locked up for filming live footage on facebook of an alleged paedphilia gang operating within the UK that were appearing in court.

This has cause worldwide controversy such as the article above which the below cartoon appeared.


The question is this a Psych 'op', did the government anticipate that by slinging someone in the slammer so quickly it would amplify the issue and demonise the Muslims in the UK / Worldwide?
Posts: 180
Joined: January 16th, 2013, 2:15 pm

Re: Latest attacks on free speech

Postby thisisunreal on June 2nd, 2018, 10:23 pm

Dear kickstones, really interesting article and subject matter in general,

Not sure this the right place, but I came across this interesting story on Zero Hedge by Stefan Molyneux. ... y-robinson

It involves a notorious fellow in the UK who goes by the name of Tommy Robinson. According to Wiki he is a far-right activist who co-founded and served as spokesman and leader of the English Defence League.

Apparently he is in the news because he was locked up for filming live footage on facebook of an alleged paedphilia gang operating within the UK that were appearing in court.

This has cause worldwide controversy such as the article above which the below cartoon appeared.

The question is this a Psych 'op', did the government anticipate that by slinging someone in the slammer so quickly it would amplify the issue and demonise the Muslims in the UK / Worldwide?

The question is this a Psych 'op', did the government anticipate that by slinging someone in the slammer so quickly it would amplify the issue and demonise the Muslims in the UK / Worldwide?

I think you have answered your own question neatly.

Tommy Robinson has received UK wide coverage on mainstream TV and news. It is clear that nothing undesired receives attention in the media. Everything in film, TV and news fulfils a purpose. I liked your use of the word, "amplification". I sense that it is appropriate, especially at this sensitive time of year in the Muslim calendar (the Holy month of Ramadan).

This forum has shown amply that many of the events that litter our past are spuriously attributed to Muslims, Arabs and Islam. So...what's this then? Something significant or simply a little reminder. Once you run an event (let's take 911 for example) you can see that it is very important to keep it at the fore of people's minds with a succession of follow up events.

Tommy Robinson can be written off as a mindless thug, which quite honestly, he seemed to be in parts in his early days of UKIP. Fewer are aware of his more recent developments and maturing, which can be illustrated by his fairly well presented debate in the Oxford University where he does rather well to highlight real community wide issues facing Islam in the UK.

I did note that the article in which you referenced is openly divisive in parts and have this neat little media trick where the first 75% of an article draws you in with sensible and thoughtful points and then BAM! It does a number on you an openly incites your annoyance by highlighting controversy.

Is Tommy Robinson being treated fairly? If gangs of white men had spent decades raping and torturing little Muslim girls, and a justly outraged Muslim reporter was covering the legal proceedings, would he be arrested?

We all know the answer to that question. And we all know why.

See what they did there? We are informed and then completely led to the conclusions that are desired. Muslims are naughty and they get away with it! There is a legal imbalance and somehow they are running the show!

And again,

Explain why elderly white men accused of pedophilia are allowed to be photographed and questioned by reporters on court steps, while Pakistani Muslims are not.

And again,

Explain why a police force that took three decades to start dealing with Muslim rape gangs was able to arrest and incarcerate a journalist within a few scant hours.

This is where it gets complicated as Islam has been made a joke in the UK. Abroad there has been a somewhat controversial 'War on Terror' (the gradual destruction of the lands in which predominantly Muslims live). However, there is a confusing ebb and flow to this as you see the appointment of a Muslim (Sadiq Khan) to an ostensibly powerful position within the UK as Mayor of London.

With that said, I think it's pretty difficult if not impossible to tease out what is going on here in terms of an end game. All I see is the use of Tommy Robinson as a useful idiot to "amplify" (to quote you again) the non issue of a 'clash of the civilisations' or the very real (unreal) fear of another terror attack.

If you read this media piece and buy into it, you will be encouraged to believe,

those Muslims are running the show and the evidence is there. Look! Tommy has been thrown behind bars!

Are 'they' running the show? No. I think by now it is obvious that as a group, Muslims are not running the show. Are they running anything? Yes. As a group of roughly 2m in the UK, they are managing incredibly well to attain and build, business, economic and social power in their localities, through mostly hard work, community and family cooperation. A cooperation that is largely unknown to the fractured British families of recent decades who often seem to be slipping backwards.

Conclusion? Just more divisive media masquerading as informed comment. Just more reminders that there are folk out there who are different and that we need to be scared of them.
Posts: 25
Joined: July 26th, 2016, 11:20 am

Re: Latest attacks on free speech

Postby PianoRacer on June 8th, 2018, 3:49 am

Molyneux himself is a very interesting character, and one with whom I am intimately familiar. He has thousands of podcasts and thousands of YouTube videos. He started out as an Anarcho-Capitalist who focused on early childhood experiences and universally applying the non-aggression principle, specifically to the State and parents, and in that capacity I think he did a remarkable job in selling those ideas.

Stefan also considers himself a philosopher and an empiricist, but in my opinion his abilities in those two areas are not particularly unique though he certainly talks a good game. At the end of the day he is a salesman and he seems to know it, given how frequently he utilizes blatant sales rhetoric and debate tactics to sell his ideas in lieu of actual logical arguments or presentation and analysis of evidence. Anyone who has read the well-known How to Win Friends and Influence People will immediately recognize many of his verbal tactics.

Over the years he has morphed his stated views and opinions seemingly to grow his popularity and audience, jumping on the pro-Trump (and apparently, pro-State) bandwagon and sliding into the murky depths of the Alt-Right and MRAs. Others have accurately pointed out the many similarities between his "community" at Free Domain Radio and a destructive cult. More details on this can be found at the FDR Liberated blog / forum here: ... vironment/

Stefan has had a big impact on many lives, including my own, and not always for the better although my personal experience was that he was a net positive, though I was better able to separate the wheat from the chaff than some seem to be. At least one suicide can be linked directly to Stefan and the advice he gave one troubled young man - Stefan loves to give advice to troubled young people, typically involving convincing them how terrible their parents are and how much better off they would be without them in their lives.

Stefan is definitely controlled opposition. I find it difficult to believe that he doesn't buy into his own spiel - even former members of his "inner circle" claim that Molyneux is his own biggest fan and truly believes the things he says, and having listened to many of his podcasts, I find it difficult to believe otherwise. I think he is driven by greed and narcissism, and that is how he is controlled into producing the content that those who promote him want him to produce. I could be wrong about that, but if I am, he is one hell of an actor, which I actually think is also true but not enough alone to explain his actions over the course of the last decade.

Here is one of his more popular past videos that struck a chord with me. Some find it a bit sensationalist which may be a valid criticism. I find that it sums things up nicely.

full link:

Sorry to stray a bit from the topic of this thread. Please move / delete if appropriate.
Posts: 34
Joined: November 10th, 2016, 2:13 am

Re: Latest attacks on free speech

Postby Tarek701 on June 19th, 2018, 1:43 am

On June 20th, the EU parliament is voting for a new EU law, called: "DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on copyright in the Digital Single Market". It practically allows to censor copyrighted content, however, it can be easily abused to censor any kind of content that does not fit the current narrative. This would be done via an "upload filter", that would check EU-wide every Internet user in the European Union what content is being currently uploaded. If that content is marked as "malicious" or somehow "copyrighted", it could be prevented from uploading. In my opinion, I think this has been the most obvious attempt so far and, if the EU parliament votes for it, is probably one of the attacks on free speech that could be felt immediately. It would mean the end to memes, videos, selfies (with background pictures of some copyrighted content) and so on.

The official EUR-LEX link to COM/2016/0593 final - 2016/0280 (COD):

The EU has proposed a new directive on copyright, encompassing a number of sections that have met with stringent criticism from policy experts and digital rights groups, who’ve decried the potential legislation as a mask for censorship – and an end to memes in Europe.

At the heart of this ire is Article 13, a section of the proposed directive that centres on the use of protected content by “information society service providers” (ISSPs), which store and give access to material uploaded by users.

On the surface, it’s a move by the EU to address the disparity in revenues generated by rightsholders of protected content and the online platforms that host the content. Exactly how it attempts to solve this, however, has proven highly controversial. At the start of June, 100 MEPs sent an open letter in opposition of the plans. This was pre

ceded by a letter from Liberties and European Digital Rights (EDRi).

(from this article: ... -copyright)

It should be noted that article 13, along with the recently entered into force GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) are more or less attempts (in my opinion) to censor free speech in the name of "copyright". Unfortunately, I cannot find the link to the article of the official EU parliament website. But there was an article, from around mid-2017, in which plans were offered to give companies more strength towards dealing with deleting "hate speech". I believe, this is a result from that.

Also, if we go meta on this, one has to ask himself/herself why this is happening recently. For example, most of the MEPs know very well that attempts like those would only damage the idealistic picture of the European Union as an union of countries working together and providing freedom, free speech, etc. So, in that case, they could not even risk such a vote, especially while the "alt-right" is in the uprise and wins more and more votes by each day. Just recently, Italy has elected a new government that could be considered politically right-wing. Is this a coincidence? What's with the world-wide uprise of the alt-right? There have been many, many movements in the past, all of them had the same potential as the "alt-right" movement, but still none of them never came into fruition. The media played, once again, a very special role in this. As we know already, all US media networks are more or less working together. So, we can even assume that the whole Trump bashing bandwagon by CNN, ABC and other "supposed" left-wing news channels is just a "scripted" show to cause an overton-window. And channels like FOX News being more positive towards Trump in any possible way, must be a part of this show. There is no other way.

I don't write often here, and if I do, it's mostly researching. But, this time, I believe we are heading towards something that I would describe as "bad", and this time, "really bad" for the world as a whole. This is not a "2012 doomsday" thing I am spitting out here; This is a serious message, that the attempts of censorship, radicalism and disinformation are slowly progressing and growing. And we need to be very aware of what's going on in our surroundings and what's being shown in TV. The moment when TV becomes reality, that's the moment we should prepare and look out. And since Trump is President, it seems like that the "World is just a theater" is becoming more and more obvious. People even suggesting Dwayne Johnson for President in 2020 just shows that something is really odd. I don't even recognize this world anymore. The funny thing is: It didn't become a clown show. It always was one. It's just finally getting so obvious. And that's the part that scares me.
Posts: 36
Joined: November 17th, 2013, 3:28 pm


Return to General World Affairs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests