Tag: wrongthink

Marco Rubio takes decisive action against foreigners celebrating Charlie Kirk’s assassination on Social Media, a firm step against political violence

On September 10, 2025, the conservative world suffered a devastating blow with the assassination of Charlie Kirk, the young and charismatic founder of Turning Point USA, during an event at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah.

The 31-year-old activist, known for his passionate defense of conservative values and close ties to Donald Trump, was struck by a bullet to the neck from a nearby rooftop while addressing thousands of students.

This act of violence has unleashed a wave of outrage, particularly due to the mockery and celebrations that have emerged on social media, a phenomenon that U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has decided to confront with a drastic measure.

Rubio announced that he will ban any foreigner who has celebrated Kirk’s assassination online from entering the country, a decision confirmed by Deputy Secretary of State Chris Landau in a statement that reverberated on September 11, 2025.

This policy reflects Rubio’s staunch stance against illegal immigration and organized crime, aligning with the Trump administration’s priorities.

The visibly shaken president ordered flags to be flown at half-staff in Kirk’s memory and announced that he will posthumously award him the Presidential Medal of Freedom, a tribute that underscores Kirk’s importance as a “giant” of his generation, according to Trump’s remarks during a 9/11 commemorative event.

Keep reading

Retired UK Police Superintendent Investigated for “Dead-Naming” Trans Activist Online

A retired police superintendent in the UK says she was targeted by her former force after using the name “Fred” in reference to transgender activist Freda Wallace in several social media posts, a move that triggered a police visit to her home and a potential criminal investigation.

Cathy Larkman, who served for over three decades with South Wales Police, said the visit came after she made remarks online about Wallace, including posts on platform X that read, “Fred blocked me” and “Fred, put that drink down.”

The posts were part of an ongoing public conversation around strip-searching policies, where Larkman voiced opposition to allowing transgender women to conduct searches on female detainees.

Although Larkman wasn’t home when officers came to her door, she later learned the visit was related to allegations of “malicious communications.”

The complaint was her use of Wallace’s former name, a practice often referred to as “dead-naming” by gender activists.

A social media account titled SEEN Police Official Open Public Network confirmed a complaint had been filed.

According to The Telegraph, the individual believed to have made the report is Lynsay Watson, a transgender former police officer known for encouraging law enforcement to criminally pursue people who challenge gender ideology. Watson was dismissed from Leicestershire Police in 2023 for gross misconduct.

Larkman’s situation follows a similar incident involving Father Ted writer Graham Linehan, who was arrested by armed officers at Heathrow Airport days earlier over a series of posts.

Raising concerns about what she describes as growing ideological pressure within the policing system, Larkman accused the institution of serving activist agendas instead of the public interest. “The police service keeps demonstrating that it is ideologically captured from the top down. It is failing the public,” she said.

Britain’s free speech environment is deteriorating rapidly under the weight of expansive censorship laws, regulatory overreach, and state-sanctioned content control.

Keep reading

Trump Admin Updates Policies to End Unlawful Weaponized Debanking

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) on Monday announced actions to end “unlawful debanking” in the federal banking system.

Comptroller of the Currency Jonathan Gould said in a statement, “The OCC is taking steps to end the weaponization of the financial system. We are working to root out bank activities that unlawfully debank or discriminate against customers on the basis of political or religious beliefs, or lawful business activities. If and when the OCC identifies such activity, it will take action to end it.”

The OCC, following an executive order signed by President Donald Trump, released a bulletin to banks clarifying how it defines “unlawful debanking” in licensing filings as well as assessing banks’ record of performance under the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). The OCC will make considerations for a bank’s “debanking” practices in determining its CRA rating.

As part of its mission to assess the extent to which the banking system has become politicized, the OCC initiatlly requested information from the nine largest regulated institutions regarding their debanking activities. The Comptroller also updated its online customer complainer website to assist consumer report.

“Individuals may have been targeted and surveilled based on where they shop or what they believe in and, in some cases, unlawfully debanked,” Gould continued. “The OCC will not tolerate the misuse of customer financial records as a political tool. The OCC intends to work with other government agencies to ensure this conduct is identified and addressed.”

The Trump executive order on debanking tasked the Small Business Administration (SBA) with ensuring that financial institutions stop the Obama- and Biden-era debanking practices, in which Democrat officials pushed financial institutions to debank disfavored companies such as crypto groups and conservative organizations.

Keep reading

Nepalese government blocks access to nearly every major social media platform

The government of Nepal has blocked public access to 26 social media and communications platforms, including Facebook, YouTube, WhatsApp and X, due to the companies’ failure to comply with the government’s demand for registration.  The deadline to register was 4 September 2025.

The Nepal Telecommunication Authority ordered the platforms to be taken offline under government direction, citing a Supreme Court-mandated compliance push that requires all digital platforms to formally register and monitor content deemed inappropriate by officials.

The Ministry of Communications and Information Technology had given the platforms seven days to comply with the “Directive on Regulating the Use of Social Media, 2080.”  The failure to do so resulted in the access being revoked, as stated by the Ministry’s spokesperson, Gajendra Kumar Thakur, who confirmed that unregistered social media platforms would be deactivated immediately.

The blocked list includes nearly every major social media platform, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Facebook Messenger, WhatsApp, X, Reddit, Rumble, LinkedIn, Signal, Pinterest, Threads, Discord, WeChat and more, Reclaim the Net said.

TikTok and Viber have not been blocked because they had completed the registration process earlier, as well as Telegram, Wetalk, Nimbuzz and Global Diary, which are either registered or currently in the process of registration.

The government’s action is a response to a collection of legal petitions filed over several years, aimed at regulating unregistered digital platforms that broadcast advertising and media content in Nepal.  Officials, including Nepal’s Minister for Communications and Information Technology, have stated that the companies were warned repeatedly to register and comply with the government’s request.

The government insists that access to the blocked platforms will be restored immediately once they comply with the registration demands, which include appointing a local representative, establishing a complaints process and taking responsibility for censoring speech, as outlined in the strict rules introduced by the Government.

The move has caused widespread confusion, disrupted communication for migrant workers, affected the tourism industry and sparked protests.  Private operator Ncell warned that 50 per cent of its internet traffic comes from social media platforms and that shutting them down would severely hurt business.

The Government says it is part of a broader effort to regulate online content and combat misinformation, although critics warn it threatens freedom of expression and press freedom.

Keep reading

FDA Official Pressures YouTube Into Removing a Channel For Posting His Own Vaccine Comments

Last week, a top official with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) apparently filed a bogus copyright claim to get a critic’s YouTube account taken down. This is an inappropriate act of censorship that, not long ago, conservatives would rightly have stood against.

“Jonathan Howard, a neurologist and psychiatrist in New York City, received an email from YouTube on Friday night, which stated that Vinay Prasad, who is the FDA’s top vaccine regulator, had demanded the removal of six videos of himself from Howard’s YouTube channel,” The Guardian reported this week. “Howard’s entire channel has now been deleted by YouTube, which cited copyright infringement.”

On his channel, Howard hosted videos of public health officials—including Prasad, Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and National Institutes of Health Director Jay Bhattacharya—making statements during the COVID-19 pandemic that turned out to be untrue or overly myopic. “I had accumulated about 350 videos, almost all of which were short clips of famous doctors saying absurd things,” Howard wrote in a blog post, “that herd immunity had arrived in the spring of 2021 and that RFK Jr. was an honest broker about vaccines, for example.” Howard is also critical of Prasad’s stance on vaccines, which Prasad now has the authority to regulate.

According to an email Howard posted, YouTube “terminated” his channel after “multiple copyright strikes” against his videos, and the “removal request” came from Prasad.

“Publishing someone else’s videos without modification or commentary is a clear copyright violation,” an FDA spokesperson told The Guardian. “The mission of Johnathan Howard was not medical transparency, but personal profit by grifting and stealing someone else’s intellectual property.”

“My YouTube channel had 256 subscribers and its videos were typically seen by dozens of people,” Howard wrote. “I never promoted the channel and made no money from it.” Besides, U.S. law allows for fair use of copyrighted material, which means someone can use protected content for purposes such as “criticism, comment, news reporting,” or “research” without the creator’s permission.

Howard is the author of the book We Want Them Infected, which criticized doctors and public health officials who advocated a herd immunity strategy for dealing with COVID-19. Howard says such warnings fed into anti-vaccine conspiracy theories. His YouTube channel collected videos of people who are now in charge of public health institutions, making what he feels were irresponsible claims during the pandemic.

But whether you agree with Howard or not, it is wrong and hypocritical for Prasad to silence his critics in this way.

Keep reading

Military Pursues AI Systems To Suppress Online Dissent Abroad

The U.S. military wants artificial intelligence to do what human propagandists cannot: create and spread influence campaigns at internet speed while systematically suppressing opposition voices abroad, according to internal Pentagon documents obtained by The Intercept.

The classified wishlist reveals SOCOM’s ambition to deploy “agentic AI or multi-LLM agent systems” that can “influence foreign target audiences” and “suppress dissenting arguments” with minimal human oversight. The military branch seeks contractors who can provide automated systems that operate at unprecedented scale and speed.

“The information environment moves too fast for military remembers [sic] to adequately engage and influence an audience on the internet,” the document said.

“Having a program built to support our objectives can enable us to control narratives and influence audiences in real time.”

As reported by The Intercept, the proposed AI systems would extend far beyond simple content generation. SOCOM envisions technology that can “scrape the information environment, analyze the situation and respond with messages that are in line with MISO objectives.” More controversially, the systems would “suppress dissenting arguments” and “access profiles, networks, and systems of individuals or groups that are attempting to counter or discredit our messages.”

The Pentagon plans to use these capabilities for comprehensive social manipulation, creating “comprehensive models of entire societies to enable MISO planners to use these models to experiment or test various multiple scenarios.”

The systems would generate targeted messaging designed to “influence that specific individual or group” based on gathered intelligence.

SOCOM spokesperson Dan Lessard reportedly defended the initiative, declaring that “all AI-enabled capabilities are developed and employed under the Department of Defense’s Responsible AI framework, which ensures accountability and transparency by requiring human oversight and decision-making.”

The Pentagon’s move comes as adversaries deploy similar technology. Chinese firm GoLaxy has developed AI systems that can “reshape and influence public opinion on behalf of the Chinese government,” according to recent reporting by The New York Times. The company has “undertaken influence campaigns in Hong Kong and Taiwan, and collected data on members of Congress and other influential Americans.”

Keep reading

MASSIVE! “In the Closet” Playwright and DOJ Lawyer Drafts Motion to Dismiss Proud Boys’ $100M Lawsuit — Biden’s Star Witness Recants, Admits Feds Forced False Testimony! NAMES NAMED! VILE CORRUPTION STILL INSIDE DOJ & FBI!

Eight months into President Trump’s second term, Biden-era operatives still infest the Department of Justice.

Check out exposé on dirty DOJ bad actors still hiding out in the agency’s darkest corners:

DOJ moves to dismiss the $100M Proud Boys lawsuit

DIRTY DOJ EXPOSE!!! We name names!!

DOJ attorney Siegmund F. Fuchs just filed paperwork to kill the case brought by Enrique Tarrio and the “Seditious Five” — men who say they were politically persecuted by Biden’s DOJ… pic.twitter.com/oIjJxnvQH0

— LindellTV (@RealLindellTV) August 29, 2025

This seemingly permanent class of partisan bureaucrats — holdovers from the Obama–Biden years and deep state administrations before them — have festered in place across administrations, surviving presidents and feeding off power like leeches, draining the institution while weaponizing justice against Trump supporters.

Now, one of them — DOJ attorney and part-time playwright Siegmund F. Fuchs — has filed paperwork to dismiss the $100 million lawsuit brought by Proud Boys leaders, in yet another bid to shield the deep state from accountability for political persecution.

The lawsuit, filed by Enrique Tarrio and the so-called “Seditious Five,” charges that Biden’s DOJ engaged in “egregious and systemic abuse of the legal system” to silence political opponents. Proud Boys civil attorneys argue their clients were railroaded with inflated charges, deprived of due process, and sentenced to decades in prison before President Trump ultimately pardoned or commuted many of them earlier this year.

Yet the Department of Justice insists there was “no misconduct.”

That claim collapses under the weight of bombshell new revelations from the government’s own star witness.

Keep reading

Graham Linehan Arrested by Armed Police Over X Posts as UK Free Speech Crisis Deepens

There are many ways to return to Britain after a long-haul flight. Maybe you get a cup of tea, a mildly annoyed customs agent, and a taxi driver who tells you London’s gone to hell. Or, if you’re Graham Linehan, you’re met at Heathrow by five armed officers who then take you into custody over things you wrote on the internet.

The man who created Father Ted and The IT Crowd, shows that helped define British humor, was arrested, detained, and taken to hospital, all because of three tweets.

He wrote later: “I was arrested at an airport like a terrorist, locked in a cell like a criminal, taken to hospital because the stress nearly killed me, and banned from speaking online.”

The Metropolitan Police confirmed that Linehan was arrested on suspicion of inciting violence, related to posts he made on X. Armed officers from the Met’s Aviation Unit escorted Linehan off of a flight from Arizona and into custody.

The tweets in question included one joke suggesting that if a “trans-identified male” is found in a women-only space, people should “make a scene, call the cops and if all else fails, punch him in the balls.”

Keep reading

UK free speech crackdown sees up to 30 people a day arrested for petty offenses such as retweets and cartoons

Bernadette Spofforth lay in jail on a blue gym mattress in a daze, finding it difficult to move, even breathe.

“I just closed down. But the other half of my brain went into Jack Reacher mode,” she said, referring to the fictional action hero. “Every single detail was in this very vivid, bright, sharp focus.”

She remembers noticing that you can’t drown yourself in the toilet, because there’s no standing water in it and the flush button is too far to reach if your head were in the bowl.  

She’d end up being detained for 36 hours in July 2024. Three girls had just been murdered in Southport, England, at a Taylor Swift-themed dance party. But Spofforth was not under suspicion for the crime.

Instead, horrified, and in the fog of a developing tragedy, she’d reposted on X another user’s content blaming newly arrived migrants for the ghastly crime — clarifying in her retweet, “If this is true.”

Hours later she realized she may have received bad information and deleted the post — but it had already been seen thousands of times. 

The murders resulted in widespread civil unrest in the UK, where mass migration is a central issue for citizens. Four police vehicles arrived at her home days later. Spofforth, 56, a successful businesswoman from Chester, was placed under arrest.

“We’re a year on now and I can honestly tell you that I don’t think I will ever recover,” she told The Post. “I don’t mean that as a victim. Those poor children were victims. But I will never trust anything the authorities say to me ever again.”

Her story is one repeated almost hourly in the UK, where data suggests over 30 people a day are arrested for speech crimes, about 12,000 a year, under laws written well before the age of social media that make crimes of sending “grossly offensive” messages or sharing content of an “indecent, obscene or menacing character.”

Social media continues to be flooded with videos of British cops banging on doors in the middle of the night and hauling parents off to jail—all over mean Facebook posts and agitated words on X.

Keep reading

Shopify Reimposes Content Restrictions Through Shop App, Reviving Ban on “Hateful” Content

Shopify has reintroduced restrictions on certain types of merchandise, targeting what it calls “hateful content.”

This marks a significant shift back toward censorship, though the company has avoided framing it that way.

The change comes more than a year after Shopify eliminated similar content bans in what was then seen as a move toward supporting free expression in commerce.

Recently, the company updated a help page related to its Shop app and payment system to include a ban on products promoting “hateful content, violence, gore, profanity, or offensive content.”

This revision, made sometime after May, and noticed by Bloomberg, applies specifically to the Shop sales channel.

While Shopify’s main platform-wide acceptable use policy still does not include a hateful content clause, this new rule effectively reintroduces content control through a different path.

The company had previously removed its ban on hateful content in July 2024.

That decision appeared consistent with CEO Tobi Lütke’s long-standing defense of open commerce.

In a 2017 blog post, Lütke wrote, “commerce is a powerful, underestimated form of expression.” He went on to say, “We don’t like Breitbart, but products are speech and we are pro free speech,” and added, “To kick off a merchant is to censor ideas…When we kick off a merchant, we’re asserting our own moral code as the superior one. But who gets to define that moral code?”

Rather than restoring the original company-wide policy, Shopify has now imposed restrictions within a specific tool. This segmentation allows the company to present itself as a neutral platform while still controlling what merchants can sell. In practice, it results in censorship through back-end enforcement.

Keep reading