Tag: wrongthink

Gestapo Tactics: German State Starts Banning AfD Candidates from Running for Office Because They Might Win

While the aging dictator of Nicaragua Daniel Ortega this week announced he was suspending elections indefinitely, Europe seems to be on a similar path – as Victor Orban’s Hungarian Fidesz Party was raided Wednesday and had their servers confiscated, and Romanian Presidential elections were anulled 2024. Now, Germany seems to have discovered a new strategy – as legacy parties are simply excluding candidates from the patriotic AfD party from elections.

Local elections are set to take place in the state of Lower Saxony, home of Volkswagen and surrounding the Free City of Hamburg, on Sept. 13, where the Alternative for Germany party is currently polling at about 20% behind Christian Democrats and Social Democrats at about 25% each. Nationally, the AfD is currently the strongest party in the polls at about 29%, and may even win a majority in the East German states of Saxony-Anhalt and Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, which elect new state parliaments and state governments in September.

So the failing legacy parties are resorting to ever more repressive measures. Along with the ever-present threat of Antifa violence, debanking, and media slander, efforts have been underway to ban the largest opposition party outright. Since the German secret political police have not been able to prove the AfD is a danger to democracy in court, these efforts by the ruling Social Democrats seem doomed to fail.

Keep reading

Canadians contacted at home by gov officials over social media posts after hate speech law passes: JCCF

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms says it is receiving reports that some Canadians have been contacted at their homes by government officials over social media posts made months or even years earlier, following the passage of Canada’s new hate speech legislation.

The organization said the reports come after Parliament passed Bill C-9, the Combatting Hate Act, which expands Canada’s hate speech laws by creating new offences, increasing penalties, and removing certain legal safeguards that previously limited prosecutions for hate-related expression. The group said Canadians who are contacted by government officials over online posts should consider recording the interaction.

“If you believe your rights have been infringed or that you have been unfairly targeted, we encourage you to submit a case application through the Justice Centre’s online portal,” the organization said.

The Justice Centre provides legal representation to Canadians who believe their constitutional rights or freedoms have been violated by federal, provincial, or municipal governments or government entities, including universities, human rights commissions, professional associations, and public school boards. It said applications for legal assistance must be submitted online.

Canada would not be the first country to begin arrests for social media posts. The Times in the UK which used freedom of information requests to examine arrests in England and Wales under Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 and Section 1 of the Malicious Communications Act 1988. The laws prohibit communications that are “grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character,” as well as messages that are “threatening, or knowingly false.”

According to The Times, there were 12,183 arrests in 2023 and 1,119 people were sentenced. The newspaper also reported that more than 65,000 arrests have been made since 2017.

Jake Hurfurt, head of research investigations at Big Brother Watch, told The Times the trend is “seriously concerning.” “Police look to be wasting countless hours on arresting people for posting things online that, while offensive, are not illegal. Heavy-handed use of vague communications offences is a threat to everyone’s freedom to express themselves online,” Hurfurt said.

Keep reading

Canadian court throws out Freedom Convoy leader’s partial acquittal

A Canadian appeals court overturned an earlier acquittal of intimidation against prominent Freedom Convoy protester and leader Pat King, saying that his earlier sentence was a “lenient penalty” and has thus ordered him to appear for new sentencing.

In a July 17 ruling, the Ontario Court of Appeal convicted King after prosecutors appealed one of his acquittals. They argued that King’s sentence given in early 2025 wasn’t severe enough.

As reported by LifeSiteNews, in February of 2025, King was handed a three-month conditional sentence for his role in the 2022 Freedom Convoy protest against COVID mandates of all forms. He was found guilty of a total of five offences in 2024, which included mischief, counselling mischief, as well as breaching a court order.

Ontario Superior Court Justice Charles Hackland had ruled that King must serve three additional months of house arrest and dedicate 100 hours to community service for his role in the Freedom Convoy. His original sentence would have been 12 months, but the court gave him credit for time served in jail before his trial.

King had used social media to organize protests of truckers in Ottawa in early 2022, in protest of former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s COVID dictates.

While he was acquitted of three intimidation charges, the government Crown lawyers appealed one of the acquittals, which found King innocent of intimidation after he had obstructed a highway. The appeals court agreed with the Crown’s ask.

“The freedom to protest does not include the right to engage in illegal conduct, and this protest evolved into what can fairly be described as an illegal occupation of a significant tract of downtown Ottawa,” wrote the three-judge panel.

“Put simply, criminal conduct is not less criminal because it occurs during a lawful protest.”

The appeals court added that his original 2024 sentence was a “lenient penalty” and a stronger penalty was needed to send a message.

In 2022, King was granted bail after spending five months in jail for his involvement with the protests. He had to pay a $25,000 fine and was banned from speaking to other Freedom Convoy members and was placed under curfew.

Keep reading

28-Year-Old Radical Arrested for Bloody Assassination of 78-Year-Old British Conservative Ann Widdecombe

78-year-old former Tory minister and Brexit Party MEP Ann Widdecombe was found dead at her home in Haytor on Dartmoor on July 9th. According to authorities at the time the popular conservative suffered ‘serious injuries’ causing her brutal death. She was murdered on July 8th.

She had been due to appear via Zoom on a Channel 5 program that afternoon, but last made contact with the production team at 12:19 pm and failed to join the call.

The assassin from Rotherham drove his car to her home and rang the bell. When the elderly woman answered, the wicked leftist pushed his way into her home and bludgeoned her to death.

At first, local Devon and Cornwall Police alleged the murder was not politically motivated, but that call was obviously wrong.

Reform UK party, on their part, insisted that the attack may have been motivated by Widdecombe’s politics – a claim that was later vindicated.

Neighbors and sources have portrayed him as withdrawn and unremarkable in public life

Officials later announced that the death was being treated as terrorism.

Keep reading

HOPE Not Hate Deletes Page Listing Slain Brexiteer Ann Widdecombe’s ‘Dangerous’ Opinions

The radical leftist HOPE Not Hate (HnH) group has deleted a section of its website detailing the supposedly offensive opinions of former Brexit Party politician Anne Widdecombe, who was allegedly murdered in her country home earlier this month.

Following the killing of Ann Widdecombe, 78, a former Conservative government minister and Member of European Parliament for Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party, HOPE Not Hate removed a publication in which it accused the Christian politician of expressing “homophobic” and “sexist” opinions, while listing numerous supposed offences.

The HnH post stated: “Despite remaking her image in recent years through her appearances on reality TV shows, Widdecombe has a long history of homophobic and sexist remarks that jar with [Nigel] Farage’s claims that his party is ‘intolerant of intolerance’.

“Indeed, embracing the dangerous and divisive politics of her new vehicle, in the first Brexit Party speech in the European Parliament, Widdecombe made a risible comparison of Britain’s departure from the EU to the emancipation of slaves.”

In a statement to The Telegraph, a spokesman for the leftist group said that it was a “straightforward editorial decision” to remove the Widdecombe section of their website, and that it was done as a “mark of respect”.

“The article was a factual account of her political record, party affiliations and public statements, and we stand by its accuracy. Its removal reflects no change in our approach: scrutinising the public records of politicians is a legitimate and essential part of journalism and of our work, and it will continue.”

“Our thoughts are with Ann Widdecombe’s family and friends, and we share the widespread shock at her death,” the organisation added.

Despite initial insistence from police that there were no indications of a political motive, the alleged murderer of Widdecombe is now being investigated as a potential act of terror by Counter Terrorism Policing South East. It has also been reported that police sweeps of the current suspect’s home contained far-left communist material.

Keep reading

De-Banked: It’s Only A Matter Of Time Before It Happens To You

“We are writing to inform you that we cannot continue serving you.

As a result of this decision, your account will be closed within 14 days from the date of this letter.

Any remaining account balances will be sent by check to the address we have on file.”

Sooner or later, expect your bank to send you a letter like this.

They won’t even tell you why they are closing your account, and you will probably have trouble opening accounts at other banks.

De-banking is a disturbing and growing trend.

In short, the ruling elite – parasites, more accurately – have weaponized the banking system to enforce conformity to their preferred narrative.

If you don’t lap up their lies about Covid, climate, elections, wars, rising crime, or whatever the media is hyping as the “current thing,” expect the financial hammer to come down on you without warning.

You could lose your ability to take payment from your customers and pay your bills at the drop of a hat.

We’ve seen banks close the accounts of prominent doctors critical of the Covid mass hysteria and politicians opposed to schemes to centralize power on a global level (globalism).

However, for every example of a bank closing a high-profile person’s account, hundreds – or thousands – of other ordinary people likely receive the same despicable treatment but are never heard from.

Keep reading

Dissent Is Not Disloyalty: The Right and Duty to Criticize the Government

“Since when have we Americans been expected to bow submissively to authority and speak with awe and reverence to those who represent us? The constitutional theory is that we the people are the sovereigns, the state and federal officials only our agents. We who have the final word can speak softly or angrily. We can seek to challenge and annoy, as we need not stay docile and quiet.”—Justice William O. Douglas, dissenting in Colten v. Kentucky (1972)

President Trump has no problem criticizing, condemning, insulting, demonizing and threatening those who refuse to fall in line.

He has branded political opponents “communists,” denounced critics as anti-American, lashed out at NATO allies, threatened to cut off trade with Spain, and referred to Iran’s leaders as “scum” amid the ongoing war.

In Trump’s America, the president is free to call other nations bad actors, label his opponents dangerous, and treat disagreement as betrayal.

But dare to criticize Trump, his administration, ICE, the police state, the war machine, the surveillance state, or the government’s steady assault on the Constitution, and you may find yourself treated as the threat.

This is the hypocrisy of the moment: those in power claim an unlimited right to criticize everyone else, while increasingly denying the people the right to criticize them.

Criticize the government, question the police state, object to ICE raids, oppose war, challenge corruption, reject propaganda, refuse to salute the party line, or insist that public officials obey the Constitution, and you may find yourself accused of being anti-American, extremist, subversive, ungrateful, communist, terrorist-adjacent or worse.

This is how free speech dies: not all at once, but by redefining dissent as disloyalty.

Yet the First Amendment was not written to mandate flattery and applause for those in power. It was written to safeguard the right of the people to criticize, condemn, expose, challenge and resist government abuses without fear of being investigated, surveilled, threatened, prosecuted or treated like enemies of the state.

The American Revolution itself began as an act of criticism.

The Declaration of Independence was a bill of complaints against a government that had abused its power, violated the rights of the people, used the military to intimidate civilians, obstructed justice, imposed unjust burdens, and treated resistance as rebellion.

By today’s standards, the Founders would likely be labeled extremists, agitators, radicals, anti-government dissidents and threats to national security.

What was once rebellion against tyranny is now being recast as a warning sign of extremism.

Keep reading

U.K. Police Offer ‘Unreserved Apology’ and £25,000 to Irish Comedian and Writer Graham Linehan After Armed Arrest at Heathrow Airport for ‘Gender-Critical’ X Posts

In September 2025, The Gateway Pundit reported that Irish comedy writer Graham Linehan, best known for creating Father Ted and The IT Crowd, was arrested at Heathrow Airport over social media posts criticizing transgender ideology.

Linehan was met by five armed officers on arrival in London and detained in connection with three posts made on X.

The posts under investigation included one in which Linehan wrote that men entering female-only spaces were committing abusive acts and should be challenged, with police called if necessary.

A second post read, “Make a scene, call the cops, and if all else fails, punch him in the balls.”

The third post flagged read, “I hate them. Misogynists and homophobes. F*** ’em.”

Linehan said he was taken into custody, locked in a cell, and later taken to the hospital because of stress.

He added that the condition for his release was that he stop posting on X.

Keep reading

Carney is considering lawsuits over “misinformation” posts

The federal government’s latest attack on free expression is straight out of 1984.

An Access to Information memo obtained by Blacklock’s Reporter shows the Industry Department is weighing legal action against social media users accused of spreading “false and misleading information.” The heavily redacted 35-page memo offers no details on the proposed legal action.

This contrasts with the Liberal government’s past stance against internet control as a human rights threat.

Four years ago, they said, “the rights and freedoms that individuals have offline must also be protected online.”

Keep reading

The UK’s Latest “Debanking” Scandal Should Give Everyone Pause

UK-based readers may recall the moment almost exactly three years ago when the word “debanking” entered the mainstream British English lexicon. The prestigious London-based private bank Coutts had just decided to close Nigel Farage’s bank account due to his unsavoury political views and alleged Russian connections. That decision turned out to be very costly.

Almost immediately, Farage did what Farage does best: he whipped up a massive media frenzy. In next to no time two senior banking scalps had been claimed: those of Dame Alison Rose, the CEO of Coutts’ parent bank and “Big Four” lender, Natwest (formerly known as the Royal Bank of Scotland) and Coutts’ chief executive Peter Flavel.

Within a month, Natwest’s share price had slumped 8%, wiping £1 billion off its market cap, much of which was being propped up with public funds, and generating juicy returns for short-selling hedge funds. As we reported at the time, the resulting scandal drew much-needed public attention to a long-standing but accelerating trend — the “de-banking” of people and organisations with politically inconvenient views:

[T]his is hardly a one-off event: as I reported a couple of weeks ago, banks on both sides of the Atlantic are increasingly debanking their customers, often without explanation. I gave the example of California-based writer, activist, and social and political commentator Elad Nehorai, whose political views and ideals could not diverge more from those of Nigel Farage. Yet he, too, had his account at Bank of America, his bank of many years, summarily closed with no apparent warning or explanation…

Without a bank account, it is almost impossible to participate in the economy. And it is getting more difficult as cash becomes harder and harder to access and use. As Alex Lo writes for South China Morning Post, “Banking is a fundamental utility like water and electricity, and that’s precisely why democratic societies are increasingly turning to its use as a method of censorship and repression.”

However, the resulting government inquiry concluded that customers were not being “debanked” for political reasons. As a result, not only has debanking continued but debanked customers now face the prospect of being blocked from setting up new accounts at other banks, as the Telegraph reported on Monday:

Banks are planning to block “debanked” customers from setting up accounts with other lenders, potentially leading to innocent people being effectively locked out of the financial system, The Telegraph can reveal.

Lobby group UK Finance is developing a platform that will allow banks to share data on their customers where they detect “markers of economic crime”.

Lloyds, Barclays and Revolut have already started sharing data about customers, leading to accounts being frozen or closed, The Telegraph understands, following a pilot in 2024.

The data-sharing platform will build on that pilot to make a UK-wide system, which could automatically bar people from opening another account.

But concerns have been raised that thousands of innocent customers and businesses who have been debanked unfairly could be barred from opening up an account with another bank, effectively leaving them locked out of the financial system.

The latest victim of the debanking trend is the left-wing news website The Canary, which has accused the Lloyds Banking Group of “withholding a substantial amount of our money”  after nearly a decade of use. The news outlet — which brands itself as “radical working-class media” — says “Lloyds has not explained why it has taken this action… despite multiple communications from us”.

Keep reading