Censorship Industrial Complex
Police Probe Journalist Over Year-Old Social Media Post
By Cindy Harper
|
British Journalist Allison Pearson of The Telegraph has found herself under an unexpected police investigation following a social media post she made last year. According to Pearson, the inquiry began with a knock on her door at 9:40 am when two officers informed her that she was under scrutiny for allegedly inciting racial hatred in a post on X. Yet, they won’t tell her what the supposedly offending post was.
Pearson recounted the visit in an article, describing her surprise as the officers delivered the news. “I was accused of a non-crime hate incident. It had to do with something I had posted on X a year ago. A YEAR ago? Yes. Stirring up racial hatred apparently,” she recalled one officer telling her. Despite her attempts to understand the specifics, the officers refused to reveal the details of her alleged offense or identify the complainant, noting only that the individual in question was designated as “the victim.” Essex Police has since clarified that the investigation is based on a report from another police force and is being pursued under section 17 of the Public Order Act 1986, which addresses materials potentially inciting racial hatred. In a statement, a spokesperson confirmed that officers had attended Pearson’s residence “to invite a woman to attend a voluntary interview on the matter.” This approach, however, has drawn criticism from free speech advocates who argue that police intervention in non-crime incidents has a chilling effect on public discourse. Pearson’s experience follows recent shifts in policing policies, stemming from a Court of Appeal decision favoring former officer Harry Miller. Miller had argued that police tracking of gender-critical opinions as hate incidents without criminality stifled free expression. Current UK Home Secretary Yvette Cooper is exploring ways to reinforce police surveillance of non-criminal hate incidents. Meanwhile, X owner Elon Musk, who has previously condemned Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s attacks on free speech, has publicly criticized British law enforcement for investigating social media posts, raising further questions about the role of police in moderating online speech. This incident has sparked a wave of criticism from various corners, including Chris Philp, the Conservative shadow home secretary, who argues that the police should focus on actual crimes rather than policing thoughts and opinions. Echoing this sentiment, Liz Truss, former prime minister, and Sir Iain Duncan Smith, the former Tory leader, have also voiced their concerns, with Truss decrying the investigation as a direct attack on free speech. Nigel Farage, leader of Reform UK, pointed out the irony of the police’s timing, noting that such actions on Remembrance Sunday, a day dedicated to democratic values and free speech, were particularly egregious. |
|
With your support, we can amplify voices that are often suppressed and spread the word about the urgent issues of censorship and surveillance.
Consider making a modest donation — just $5, or whatever amount you can afford. Your contribution will empower us to reach more people, educate them about these pressing issues, and engage them in our collective cause. Thank you for considering a contribution. Each donation not only supports our operations but also strengthens our efforts to challenge injustices and advocate for those who cannot speak out.
Thank you.
|
Censorship Industrial Complex
Canada’s justice minister confirms ‘hate crimes’ bill applies to online content
From LifeSiteNews
Individuals could be criminally charged for social media posts or other online content deemed offensive by the government under the Combating Hate Act.
Canadian Justice Minister Sean Fraser admitted that his new “hate crime” bill would indeed allow a person to be criminally charged for social media posts deemed offensive by the government.
Recently asked about Bill C-9, the Combating Hate Act, Fraser said the bill would indeed apply to certain online content that involves the “willful promotion of hatred.”
“Generally speaking, the law will apply equally online as it does in real communities,” he said, adding, “just in the limited circumstances where there is the willful promotion of hatred against someone.”
As reported by LifeSiteNews, Bill C-9 has been blasted by constitutional experts as allowing empowered police and the government to go after those it deems have violated a person’s “feelings” in a “hateful” way.
Bill C-9 was brought forth in the House of Commons on September 19 by Fraser. The Liberals have boasted that the bill will make it a crime for people to block the entrance to, or intimidate people from attending, a church or other place of worship, a school, or a community center. The bill would also make it a crime to promote so-called hate symbols and would, in effect, ban the display of certain symbols such as the Nazi flag.
While being questioned by Conservative MP Andrew Lawton about Bill C-9, Fraser was asked if the new law would “affect what people can say and write on the internet” and also if people could be retroactively punished for online comments made today.
In reply, Fraser said, “The only circumstance where you could imagine some online comment attracting scrutiny under this law would attach to behaviour that is criminal today but would be punished less severely.”
He said that “(t)he willful promotion of hate is a crime today, but we want to recognize a distinct charge where that same behaviour uses certain symbols of hate to bring a higher degree of culpability.”
John Carpay of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) has blasted Bill C-9 as something that would “empower police” and the government to go after those it deems have violated a person’s “feelings” in a “hateful” way.
Also, as reported by LifeSiteNews, Conservative MP Leslyn Lewis called out the hypocrisy of Bill C-9 for being silent regarding rising “Christian hate.”
Lewis has warned before that Bill C-9 will open the door for authorities to prosecute Canadians’ speech deemed “hateful possibly.”
Carpay also lamented how the bill mentions “rising antisemitism” but says nothing about the arson attacks on Catholic and Christian churches plaguing Canada.
“Anti-Catholic hate is obviously not on the minister’s radar. If it were, he would have mentioned it when introducing the Combating Hate Act,” Carpay wrote.
Since taking power in 2015, the Liberal government has introduced numerous new bills that, in effect, censor internet content and restrict people’s ability to express their views.
Now that Trump is running Washington, Conservative thinkers must ponder a new-found appreciation for silencing speech they don’t like.
From StosselTV
War on Words: Both Parties Try to Silence Speech They Don’t Like
Donald Trump, before he was reelected, said he’d end government censorship. But now that he’s in office? He calls speech he doesn’t like “illegal.”
Free Speech should be a bedrock American value, no matter who’s in office. After the murder of Charlie Kirk, Republicans, who once complained about censorship, became censors. Democrats suddenly flip-flopped. All politicians should remember, the way to fight speech you don’t like, is with more speech, not censorship.
After 40+ years of reporting, I now understand the importance of limited government and personal freedom.
——————————————
Libertarian journalist John Stossel created Stossel TV to explain liberty and free markets to young people.
Prior to Stossel TV he hosted a show on Fox Business and co-anchored ABC’s primetime newsmagazine show, 20/20.
Stossel’s economic programs have been adapted into teaching kits by a non-profit organization, “Stossel in the Classroom.” High school teachers in American public schools now use the videos to help educate their students on economics and economic freedom. They are seen by more than 12 million students every year.
———
To make sure you receive the weekly video from Stossel TV, sign up here: https://www.johnstossel.com/#subscrib…
———
Disabled Canadians increasingly under pressure to opt for euthanasia during routine doctor visits
Petition threatens independent school funding in Alberta
From Underdog to Top Broodmare
Busting five myths about the Alberta oil sands
-
MAiD21 hours ago
Disabled Canadians increasingly under pressure to opt for euthanasia during routine doctor visits
-
Alberta23 hours ago
Petition threatens independent school funding in Alberta
-
Alberta2 days ago
Busting five myths about the Alberta oil sands
-
Courageous Discourse2 days agoNo Exit Wound – EITHER there was a very public “miracle” OR Charlie Kirk’s murder is not as it appears
-
Business22 hours agoCanada Revenue Agency found a way to hit “Worse Than Rock Bottom”
-
Energy2 days agoMinus Forty and the Myth of Easy Energy
-
Health2 days agoNew report warns WHO health rules erode Canada’s democracy and Charter rights
-
Digital ID20 hours agoToronto airport requests approval of ‘digital IDs’ for domestic airport travel