Tag: censorship

Munich Security Conference Chairman Goes on Stage and Cries Like a Baby After J.D. Vance Rocks His World

Vice President J.D. Vance delivered a fiery speech at the Munich Security Conference on Friday, taking direct aim at European elites for their war on free speech and authoritarian censorship tactics.

In a no-holds-barred address, Vance exposed the hypocrisy of European leaders, who claim to champion democracy while silencing dissent and weaponizing so-called ‘misinformation’ laws to crush political opposition.

Vice President Vance warned Europe that the greatest danger the continent faces today is from within and that censorship of free speech and silencing of their political opponents.

Vance accused European leaders of fear of their own people and warned them that the real threat against their democracy was their assault on individual rights.

The EU elites did not take the news well. They were hoping for another empty, vapid speech filled with exaggerated praise from the Trump regime.

Boy, were they wrong!

Following Vice President Vance’s speech Christoph Heusgen, the Chairman of the Munich Security Conference took the stage – and started to cry.

There is nothing that brings terror to the evil global forces than a grown man crying after J.D. Vance rocked his world.

Of course, the crowd gave Chairman Heusgen rousing applause.

Keep reading

Germany’s Shocking War on Online Speech: Armed Police Raids for Online “Insults,” “Hate Speech,” and “Misinformation”

A shocking discussion on CBS News’ 60 Minutes has highlighted the stark limits of online speech in Germany, where oppressive scenes once thought to be relegated to history and dystopian fiction, show law enforcement has been conducting pre-dawn raids and confiscating electronics from individuals accused of posting content deemed as “hate speech.”

In typical Orwellian fashion, despite these speech raids, officials insist that free speech still exists.

Dr. Matthäus Fink joined host Sharyn Alfonsi to explain how these laws operate and how those targeted by authorities typically react. According to Fink, most individuals are initially shocked when police confront them over online posts.

“They say — in Germany we say, ‘Das wird man ja wohl noch sagen dürfen,’” Fink remarked, illustrating the disbelief many express when they realize their statements can result in legal action. He noted that many Germans assume they are protected by free speech laws but learn too late that specific kinds of speech are punishable.

Alfonsi delved deeper, questioning the scope of these restrictions. Beyond banning swastika imagery and Holocaust denial, Fink pointed out that publicly insulting someone is also a criminal offense.

“And it’s a crime to insult them online as well?” Alfonsi asked.

Fink affirmed that online insults carry even steeper penalties than face-to-face insults. “The fine could be even higher if you insult someone in the internet,” he elaborated. “Because in internet, it stays there. If we are talking face to face, you insult me, I insult you, OK. Finish. But if you’re in the internet, if I insult you or a politician…”

Keep reading

US Tech companies, Including X and Google, Threaten To Leave Starmer’s Leftist Britain Over the Cost of Funding Online ‘Safety’ Censorship

As the ‘Trump Tornado’ is forcefully rearranging things all over Europe, there’s a justified expectation about the Donald J. Trump administration’s reaction to the ill-disguised push for censorship in the upcoming ‘Online Safety Act.’

As of now, Tech companies, including Elon Musk’s X and Google, have warned businesses could leave the PM Keir Starmer’s leftist experiment in Britain over the cost of funding the online safety crackdown.

Google said the fees charged to internet companies will drive services out of the UK, while X says it will ‘disincentivize’ global companies from entering the British market.

The Telegraph reported:

“Ofcom [British Office of Communications] has laid out plans to raise around £70m a year to cover the costs of enforcing the new laws, which take effect in the coming months. They will require tech companies to introduce age checks and limit exposure to harmful content. The bill would almost entirely be borne by the largest five providers – believed to be Meta, Google, Microsoft, Apple and TikTok – [that] would face charges equal to 0.02pc of global revenue.”

Keep reading

‘An Alamo Moment for the First Amendment’: Congress Holds Hearing on Government Censorship

Censorship by the U.S. government dominated Wednesday’s U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee hearing on the censorship-industrial complex Wednesday.

The often-contentious hearing featured testimony by investigative journalists Matt Taibbi and Michael Shellenberger, who released documents as part of the “Twitter Files” that revealed the government’s efforts to censor online speech, including narratives that contradicted official government policy on COVID-19.

Taibbi and Shellenberger’s testimony, and that of Canadian journalist Rupa Subramanya of The Free Press, also focused on the global encroachment of the censorship-industrial complex and the Trump administration’s efforts to shut down the U.S. Agency for International Development or USAID, which is accused of funding censorship-related efforts globally.

“USAID is just a tiny piece of the censorship machine” which uses “think tanks, research, fact-checking, anti-disinformation, commercial media scoring and … straight up censorship” to “transform the free press into [a] consensus machine,” Taibbi said.

Shellenberger suggested the “censorship-industrial complex is on the defensive” today, but that “it’s also clear that many governing and media elites worldwide view expanding censorship of online platforms as a must have, not a nice to have feature of global governance.”

Keep reading

UK Could Weaken Online Censorship Law To Avoid US Trade Battle

As European leaders scramble to shield their economies from impending US tariffs, the UK’s Labour government appears ready to make significant concessions. Facing the risk of economic fallout, Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s administration has reportedly signaled to Washington that it is open to revising the controversial and dangerous Online Safety Act — legislation critics have described as an aggressive censorship regime.

The Act, which gives UK regulators the power to fine tech companies for failing to remove vaguely defined “harmful content,” has been a major point of contention between the two allies and has become a major threat to free speech online. The Trump administration has been especially vocal in its opposition, viewing the law as an affront to free speech and a potential financial burden on US tech giants.

According to The Telegraph:

“Downing Street is willing to renegotiate elements of the Act in order to strike a trade deal, should it be raised by the US, The Telegraph understands. The law has been heavily criticized by free speech advocates and economists, who argue its broad provisions to tackle harmful online content could lead to excessive censorship and deter investment from American tech giants.”

The Online Safety Act arms UK media regulator Ofcom with sweeping new authority over social media platforms, enabling the imposition of multimillion-pound fines for failing to police content according to government directives. While supporters claim the law is necessary to protect users, critics argue that its vague wording and punitive approach encourage preemptive censorship — where platforms remove lawful content simply to avoid regulatory punishment.

Keep reading

Censorship Industrial Complex Hearing Highlights Democrat Denial of Big Tech Censorship Collusion

US House Democrats seem to have chosen the path of not taking any accountability whatsoever for the goings-on during a number of previous years, which resulted in an unprecedented form of “public-private partnership” – what is known, and investigated, as the government-Big Tech censorship collusion.

The House Judiciary Committee is behind one of the more prominent investigations (yet another is conducted by the Committee on Small Businesses) and the Judiciary body just held a hearing titled, “The Censorship-Industrial Complex.”

But it was mostly an opportunity for Democrats who showed up to deny, deflect, downplay – pretty much every point of this fundamentally important problem.

Democrat members of the House of Representatives present – Jamie Raskin, Eric Swalwell, Jasmine Crockett, Pramila Jayapal – had to first sit there and listen to Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, a Republican, open by painting the big, and damning picture of how the events relevant to the inquiry unfolded over the years of the Biden administration.

Keep reading

Ayanna Pressley Says Dems Will Work With Anyone Serious About CENSORING Americans

Massachusetts Representative Ayanna Pressley admitted Tuesday just how far she and fellow Democrats are willing to go to stop Elon Musk and DOGE from exposing and eliminating government waste – silencing Americans. No, really! Today, Pressley said she and her colleagues want to censor Americans to advance their ‘progressive’ political goals.

Hear her for yourself. 

Democrats love trampling on Americans’ rights of free speech and freedom of the press so Pressley is speaking the truth here.

Commenters weren’t shocked since they know this is what most Democrats believe based on their efforts to control online speech.

Keep reading

Senator Ron Johnson Demands Meta Releases Records on COVID-19 Vaccine Injury Censorship

Senator Ron Johnson, Chairman of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, has escalated his scrutiny of Meta’s alleged suppression of COVID-19 vaccine injury discussions, demanding that CEO Mark Zuckerberg release internal records detailing Facebook’s content moderation practices.

More: Facebook and YouTube Censored Victims of AstraZeneca COVID Vaccine

In a letter dated February 4, 2025, Johnson specifically questioned Facebook’s removal of vaccine injury support groups, including A Wee Sprinkle of Hope, which was described in the book Worth a Shot? as the largest such group in the world before it was shut down just five days after Johnson’s June 28, 2021, roundtable with vaccine-injured individuals.

We obtained a copy of the letter for you here.

The letter also reiterated claims that Facebook engaged in shadow banning, appended warning labels to users’ posts about vaccine injuries, and even censored private messages. One particularly tragic case cited in Worth a Shot? described a woman who took her own life after her private messages seeking help from fellow vaccine-injured individuals allegedly went unnoticed due to Facebook’s restrictions on message visibility.

Keep reading

Trump Cracks Down on Pro-Censorship CISA, Puts Key Officials on Leave

President Donald Trump appears to be making good on a number of campaign promises, including those moves aimed at ending practices that, during the previous administration, resulted in wide-scale censorship collusion between the government and large tech companies.

According to a number of insider documents, lawsuits, and Congressional investigations, the reason for this “joint work” in flagging, removing, deplatforming, and committing other forms of free speech violations was most often justified as the need to combat “misinformation” – usually election, or Covid-related.

But critics have for years insisted that the actual result was First Amendment violations, through the exertion of control over speech and therefore public opinion ahead of an election (such as the discrediting of the Hunter Biden laptop story as “misinformation” and an example of supposed foreign interference).

And, the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) by all accounts “excelled” at this work.

Keep reading

EU Launches “Democracy Shield” Initiative to Tighten Controls on Tech Giants and Enforce “Hate Speech” Compliance

EU’s new “European Union Democracy Shield (EUDS)” committee, which aims to impose more control over tech giants now perceived as aligned with US President Trump, and promote their compliance with “hate speech” laws while imposing more “fact-checking” has gained its chair – French member of European Parliament (MEP) and French President Macron-allied politician Nathalie Loiseau.

The EUDS initiative was first unveiled by EU Commission’s Executive VP Henna Virkkunen, and Loiseau appears to have been given the job in true unelected-Brussels-bureaucracy fashion: this was known before a vote on her nomination took place.

“Nathalie Loiseau will be elected this evening at 6 pm,” it was announced early on Monday by La Lettre (this effective appointment has in the meantime been confirmed).

And it gets worse – another French MEP, Virginie Joron, said that Loiseau had announced she would be elected “the weekend before” those electing her had a chance to vote.

Stalin could never.

However – given the role that “Democracy Shield” is expected to play, namely, control speech/opinions, this odd process is seen by some as basically symbolic of the body’s purpose – albeit it happens to be one that is “denying democracy.”

Loiseau is a member of the European Parliament’s Renew group, whereas Joron is from the Patriots for Europe (PfE); the manner in which the EUDS selected its chief was particularly offensive to the latter since the PfE had hoped to have its own candidate, Antonio Tanger Correa – but that was rendered pointless by the manner in which Loiseau was appointed.

Correa denounced it as a “sham democracy” while Joron slammed the European Parliament’s “theater” where one can get “elected” before the vote.

Keep reading