Why Europe fears free speech

A war of repression is under way

We all know the old joke: when a European referendum delivers the “wrong” outcome, the country votes again until they get it “right”. The EU thought this would be the case after Brexit. But so far, no one’s laughing.

If anything, things have got worse. Take Romania, which recently cancelled its presidential election when Călin Georgescu, leader of a nationalist Right coalition, won the first round. Thierry Breton, former French European Commissioner, revealed the EU’s mindset during a damning recent TV interview. “We did it in Romania and we will obviously do it in Germany if necessary,” he said. In other words, if you can’t beat the far-Right, ban them.

Share

The age of Trudeau’s censorship schemes is over

By proroguing Parliament on Monday, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau snuffed the life out of one of his favourite darlings: Bill C-63, also known as the online harms act.

There’s no excuse for suspending democracy at a time like this, but we should at least celebrate the death of this atrocious bill. Had it (or the two bills the Liberals were to replace it with) passed, the Canadian Human Rights Commission would have been made sheriff of the Canadian internet, empowering it to drag anyone through a lengthy tribunal process making online comments perceived to be hateful. What’s worse, anyone reporting mean comments to this tribunal would be allowed to remain anonymous, which would have allowed the process to be weaponized with ease.

 

Share

American Free Speech vs. European Censorship

The European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA) obliges US social media platforms to take a whole arsenal of preventive and repressive measures, basically to prevent the sharing of information that displeases the European Commission. The new US administration will not tolerate levying fines of tens of billions of dollars on major US technology companies by a European Union that is drifting towards authoritarianism and is at the same time more dependent than ever on American power.

Share

US cartoonist quits Washington Post over Trump, Bezos sketch

A Pulitzer Prize-winning American cartoonist has quit the Washington Post newspaper, claiming her latest sketch was axed by her editor due to its lampooning of the relationships between prominent tech and media figures and US President-elect Donald Trump.

Illustrator Ann Telnaes, 64, announced her resignation via her own Substack blog on Saturday, including a draft of the political cartoon in the post and accusing her editor of preventing her from doing the “critical job” of “[holding] powerful people and institutions accountable.”


A freedom of the press issue?

A reminder that the “press” almost universally lied about Covid about Biden’s descent into dementia and has smeared Donald Trump 24/7 since 2015. 

Share

Canadian-born journalist at centre of U.S. press freedom legal battle after refusing to identify source

Toronto-born journalist Catherine Herridge has spent 37 years working for some of the biggest media outlets in the U.S., including broadcasters ABC, CBS and Fox. But she’s now become the central figure in a high-stakes legal battle over freedom of the press and whether journalists can be compelled to disclose confidential sources.

Ms. Herridge, 60, was held in contempt of court last February by a district judge in Washington for refusing to identify the source for a story about U.S. academic Yanping Chen and her alleged ties to the Chinese military.

Share

Two-tier policing is real – just ask Christians

If you have ever doubted the existence of two-tier policing in the UK, just look at the appalling treatment of Christian street preachers. Earlier this year, a Christian pastor called Dia Moodley was arrested and held in a police cell for 13 hours. His alleged ‘crime’ was to have criticised Islam. Most of the details only emerged last week.

Share

US: In Danger of Losing Freedom of Speech, Replaced by Politburo

John Kerry – Lunatic

Some politicians in the US are itching to take away your free speech rights and, given the chance, if they get enough votes, they will. How do we know? Because they tell us that they will.

Last week, at a World Economic Forum (WEF) panel on climate, former US Secretary of State and Biden-Harris administration climate envoy John Kerry complained that the First Amendment prevents the US government from shutting down what it deems to be “disinformation” on social media, which makes it more difficult to “hammer disinformation out of existence… particularly in democracies,” he lamented.

Share

Joanna Baron: The U.K.’s disastrous online speech laws should give Canada pause before implementing our own

“It’s absolutely ridiculous. Don’t protect the mosques. Blow the mosques up with the adults in it,” 53-year-old Julie Sweeney posted in response to a photo showing people cleaning up in the aftermath of the Southport rioting in a local Cheshire Facebook group. She later deleted her account in shame. Nevertheless, three police cars soon showed up at Sweeney’s home to arrest her. Within days, she was sentenced to 15 months imprisonment after pleading guilty to sending communications threatening death or serious harm, an offence under the U.K.’s 2023 Online Safety Act.

Share

Expressing an opinion is not incitement to violence

‘Don’t protect the mosque. Blow the mosque up with the adults in it.’

That Facebook comment has earned a Cheshire woman 15 months in prison. Julie Sweeney was reacting to a photo of people helping to repair a mosque in the aftermath of the riots triggered by last month’s stabbing attack in Southport that left three children dead. The prosecutor conceded that Sweeney was posting out of anger and not making a genuine threat, but the judge said that ‘so-called keyboard warriors like her, have to learn to take responsibility for their inflammatory and disgusting language’.

Share

Jordan Peterson’s free speech crusade in the courts ends after Supreme Court dismisses application for leave to appeal

Author Jordan Peterson’s legal battle with the College of Psychologists of Ontario (CPO) has come to an end.

On Thursday, the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed his application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Ontario with costs. No reasons were given.

Peterson had asked Canada’s highest court to consider hearing an appeal of a decision upholding a lower court ruling that he take social media training as ordered by the College. Peterson has been a registered clinical psychologist since 1999, but has not had a clinical practice since 2017.

Share

Labrador man denied long-sought hearing about his detainment for a tweet

A Labrador man has lost his bid for a long-sought public hearing about his detainment by police in 2015 at a mental health hospital for a post he made on social media.

Andrew Abbass has alleged for years that his detention by members of the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary at a western Newfoundland hospital was illegal, and he has fought for a hearing that would examine the circumstances of his arrest.

In a decision dated Thursday, an adjudicator with the force’s public complaints commission said such a hearing would be “desirable” but ruled that Abbass did not file his complaint soon enough.


“How about this Premier of N.L. I’m going to bring down Confederation and have politicians executed,” one of Abbass’s tweets said. “Ready to have me shot, coward?”

Doesn’t seem an unreasonable thing to say about Trudeau.

Share

Creating Online harms regulators expected to cost Canada $200 million: PBO

OTTAWA – The parliamentary budget officer estimates that staffing up the new regulators in the Liberals’ Online Harms Act will cost around $200 million over five years.

The federal government wants to establish a Digital Safety Commission to regulate social-media companies and force them to limit harmful content online.

Share

Canada’s Elites Suppress Freedom of Speech on Indigenous Matters

Under Section 2 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Canadians are guaranteed freedom of thought, belief, and expression. These freedoms are fundamental in our democratic society. In fact, an official government commentary on the charter states: “In a democracy, people must be free to discuss matters of public policy, criticize governments and offer their own solutions to social problems.”

Given this claim, it is indeed a mystery why free speech is protected when people say that Israel’s policies and practices towards the Palestinians are “racist,” but not when they say that Canada’s policies and practices towards indigenous peoples are “racist.”
Share

Dutch Ban on ‘From the River to the Sea’ Chant Raises Free Speech Questions

Parliamentarians in the Dutch lower house narrowly voted this week to criminalise the chant “from the river to the sea,” which calls for Israel to be wiped off the map. There are questions over how the motion, passed by just 74-73 votes, will be enacted. But more importantly, it strikes at the heart of the debate over the limits of free speech.

Members of Geert Wilders’ populist Party for Freedom said the ban was in response to “a disturbing increase in anti-Semitic incidents in the Netherlands.” The motion adds that “from the river to the sea” comes “right off the Hamas charter and is therefore a call for violence against all Jews worldwide.”

Share

Antisemitism Tsarina: If the DEI Cabal grants Jews victimhood status then they can continue hating on White People.

Eliminating religion as a hate speech defence an idea worth exploring, says antisemitism envoy

Canada’s special envoy for combating antisemitism says she’s “very interested” in exploring the idea of eliminating religion as a possible defence against hate speech charges.

Deborah Lyons, whose mandate also includes preserving Holocaust remembrance, appeared Thursday before a parliamentary committee that is studying antisemitism on university campuses.

Jewish leaders, students and faculty have been voicing concerns about an increase in hate speech and violence since the beginning of the Israel-Hamas war last fall.


Lyons said she believes universities’ equity, diversity and inclusion strategies are “failing Jews in this country” because they don’t make much mention of antisemitism specifically.

So our Antisemitism Tsarina is saying that if the DEI Cabal grants Jews victimhood status then the cabal can continue hating White People.

Why not call for the dismantling of the DEI Cabal?

Does she not get that DEI is all about anti-White racism? Or is it that she approves?

 

Share