British Citizens, Tulsi Gabbard, Elon Musk, and Scott Ritter Are All Being Targeted for their Speech
At a time when whistleblowers (such as Julian Assange and Edward Snowden) are politically targeted by government agencies when they speak out, and commentators have their online posts censored when the government pressures social media companies to eliminate unfavorable content, former United Nations Special Commission weapons inspector Scott Ritter had his Town of Bethlehem, Upstate New York home raided by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for alleged violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act. Although some of his electronic equipment was seized in an investigation apparently related to his work as a journalist corresponding with and receiving compensation from RT (Russia Today) and Sputnik (he has also received compensation from other non-Russian news outlets), it is concerning that the United States government would attempt to silence a vocal critic of American foreign policy (previously, the government had confiscated his passport when he was boarding a flight to Russia for a conference). His work has included attempting to mend relations between the United States and Russia (something that is unpopular with the powers that be) and ending American taxpayer support for Ukraine (something that I have also criticized myself, but I am not big enough to be considered a problem). If you are prominent and vocal about opposing the military-industrial complex and advocating against war, eventually, government agents will come looking for you, as they can utilize any of the millions of laws on the books at any convenient time (or even plant evidence to make it look like you committed a crime that you did not commit) and eliminate you from the public sphere.
Additionally, it has just been revealed that the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) is following the lead of whistleblowers who have claimed that former Democratic Party member and critic of the deep state Tulsi Gabbard has been “surveilled” and placed on the Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) Quiet Skies program, which means that she has “two Explosive Detection Canine Teams, one Transportation Security Specialist (explosives), one plainclothes TSA Supervisor, and three Federal Air Marshals” follow her around on every flight. Clearly, this TSA program is meant to intimidate not only the targets of surveillance but also to cause a chilling effect that will make Americans less likely to speak out against the government for fear that they could be put on a terrorist watch list. If Gabbard were really a terrorist, the government would prevent her from flying altogether and issue a warrant for her arrest, but instead, the government bypasses the Fourth Amendment and covertly spies on people without justification. Some free country we live in, huh?
If speaking out against the government gets you placed on a terrorist watch list, censored on social media, or raided by government agencies, the United States might be closer to totalitarianism than most believe. If people who have a large audience to sway popular opinion are targeted or charged with crimes that they otherwise would not have been, the political targeting and weaponization of the justice system are performed simply to permit us to only say government-approved narratives, and we are not truly free to speak our actual minds. When so-called “misinformation” and “conspiracy theories” become negative terms in society and are considered things that need to be prevented by government agencies, you know that freedom of speech is a concept that no longer exists in reality.
At least in the United States, the government still needs to plant evidence on you for an unrelated crime or dig up something in your history where you violated some kind of law at some time in your life before arresting you for speech, but in the United Kingdom, the British government is just overtly jailing people for posting or reposting social media content that is arbitrarily deemed as offensive or hate speech. In fact, a few people have been charged with posting videos and other content online that was considered “inciting” a riot and racial hatred and causing “harm” to those watching it. How does watching a video harm anyone or incite violence? You can choose to ignore something if you cannot handle it, or you can choose whether or not to react aggressively to a video that you see. You do not need Big Brother to come in and protect you and keep you safe from an online post. If a video sparks outrage and causes people to protest, that is just too bad for the government. Protests are something that should be permitted in any free country, and if people become violent, you arrest them for those actions only.
In a specific example, a woman was arrested for simply making a post that inaccurately identified and described the background of the suspect who stabbed three children in Southport, England. Yes, her crime was causing racial division and hatred (the suspect’s parents were from Rwanda) and apparently pushing an agenda that assisted rioters. Instead of trying to protect the free speech of protesters, the British government is more concerned about not offending a person who murdered children.
That murder has caused riots across the entire country, and hundreds of people have been arrested so far, as citizens are protesting the government’s lenient immigration policies (these policies are blamed on the stabbing and other incidents). Tommy Robinson (Stephen Yaxley-Lennon), who is being branded as a far-right anti-Islamic racist, is the scapegoat for these riots, as he has been forced to flee the United Kingdom and seek asylum elsewhere to avoid arrest. Robinson is still posting about the riots and content that is causing people to want to stand up and take action against the government.
Social media is being blamed for the violence, and the British government wants its citizens to “think before you post” and be “held accountable for our actions.” British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who has said that people should be “mindful” of what they post and put in front of judges as a consequence for publishing certain material, is looking into ways to prevent future riots, including pressure against social media companies to crack down on speech (like what is being done in the United States).
This is dangerous. If people are afraid to speak their minds because they might get a trip in a police car for saying the wrong thing, think about what this ultimately means. Freedom of speech does not mean that you can only speak favorable narratives. It allows you to challenge government, society, and yes, even people who are not racially white. You do not have to like or agree with what others say, but you do have to tolerate it, regardless of how disgusting or ludicrous the speech may seem (even inaccurate posts). What makes what the British government is doing even more outrageous is the fact that you can simply repost someone else’s content and still be in trouble with the law.
Although the United States is not yet at this point in its totalitarian journey, we are moving closer to it, and if this madness can be done in the United Kingdom, it can certainly be justified in the “land of the free.” In fact, something similar to Britain’s Online Safety Act, which is the justification that the government uses to arrest people for social media posts, is already being proposed in the United States. The Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), if passed, would allow the unelected bureaucrats to determine what is “appropriate” for families to see and hear online. So, yes, we are in the infant stages of implementing policies that allow the government to arrest people for speaking their minds or posting the content of their choice.
In another effort at censorship, the European Union (EU) has threatened Elon Musk with penalties and insisted that he (through his social media company X) crack down on narratives that are unfavorable, and of course, the Biden administration remains silent on the issue and does not protect the American billionaire from this foreign threat out of hatred for him. Furthermore, the EU attempted to pressure Musk to cancel a planned conversation with Republican nominee Donald Trump, and the same liberals and progressives who cried about Russian interference in the 2016 election are perfectly comfortable with a different foreign government meddling in the election and trying to silence their political opponent (you can target Elon Musk and Donald Trump, but just do not embarrass the deep state’s golden child Hillary Clinton). You cannot make up the hypocrisy being displayed on the left side of American politics, and Trump Derangement Syndrome is real (violate any principles, destroy democracy, and pay any censorship cost, as long as Trump remains out of office).
Free speech is essential to any descent form of government, and without it, we cannot make informed decisions. However, both the American and British governments have made it clear that protecting the interests of the state is more important than individual freedom, and authoritarianism is now the prominent way of life in the West. Misinformation is being portrayed as one of the largest threats to democracy, and policies are being sought by experts to solve the issue of preventing the free expression and exchange of ideas. Yet, ironically, it is actually actions taken against misinformation that is the threat to a republican form of government (maybe this makes the distinction between democracy and republic even more important, as the majority can silence the minority in a democracy). If policing misinformation is one of your biggest concerns, you are not a free speech advocate.
Did you ever think that you would see the United States regress into a police and surveillance state bent on sniffing out narratives that are unfavorable to government power? Well, here we are. Do we as a society want to continue with the status quo out of fear of retribution from the state, or do we want to live free? Would we rather make excuses for authoritarianism out of convenience, or would it be better to stand up and fight the powers that be? The choice is ours.
Thank you for reading, and please check out my book, The Global Bully, and website.