Skip to main content

Share

David Cameron unveils plans to ban free speech and protest

The government has unveiled plans to ban anyone who criticises it from appearing on TV or protesting.
Under the guise of protecting the public from ‘extremism’ the government proposal will allow police to vet the social media activity of “harmful” individuals and curb their right to speak at public events.
The maximum sentence could be up to 10 years in prison for breaking a banning order.
These new plans would also promise greater powers for British police to access internet data.
Targeted individuals will also be barred from certain public spaces and from associating with named people. The plans were unveiled by Theresa May at the Conservative Party Conference and reiterated by David Cameron, in his speech on ‘extremism’.
So who is included under this new definition of extremists? Are we just talking about people who allegedly bomb buildings?
Well, according to David Cameron, the law will target “non-violent conspiracy theorists” who he claims are just as dangerous as the ISIS terrorists and must therefore, be eradicated.
He referenced 9/11 and 7/7 Truthers as examples of the type of extremism that must be dealt in a similar fashion to ISIS.
Such individuals are deemed to be a threat to “the functioning of democracy.”
Furthermore, the Home Office claimed that the government’s “counter-extremism” strategy would encompass “the full spectrum of extremism”.
In other words, you no longer have to be violent or cause harm to another to be declared a terrorist. David Cameron has announced that even those with views that are not accepted by the government will now be deemed extremists.
In addition, police curbing orders would also target those who undertake activities “for the purpose of overthrowing democracy,” a broad definition that could encompass political activists of varying views.
Radical Muslims and far-right organisations would also be classified as terrorists.
As the law currently stands, organisations can only be banned if there is evidence of links to terrorism.
Under the new law, and according to David Cameron’s own definition, anyone who criticises the functioning of the government or the official version of events could be subject to laws which severely restrict their freedom of speech and movement. Theresa May also stressed that you do not necessarily have to have committed a crime to be subject to these new orders.
Announcing these draconian new measures, Mr Cameron added: “The problem that we have had is this distinction of saying we will only go after you if you are an extremist that directly supports violence.”
In addition, those who become the target of government intervention would also be prevented from holding positions of authority in local communities and schools.
Enhanced powers will allow the Charity Commission to close down groups deemed to be fronts for “extremist activity” as a means of tackling funding streams.
The law is part of a series of new measures that effectively ban the right to free speech in this country.
Earlier this year, the Akashic Times reported on how Fixated Threat Assessment Centre (FTAC) laws targeted individuals who they claim pose a direct threat to VIPs including the Prime Minister, the Cabinet and the Royal Family.
 It was given sweeping powers to check more than 10,000 suspects’ files to identify mentally unstable potential “killers and stalkers” with a fixation against public figures.
The team’s psychiatrists and psychologists then have the power to order treatment – including forcibly detaining suspects in secure psychiatric units.
The law targeted activists who were the most vocal about criticising the Royal Family. Activist David Compan was imprisoned without charges in a London mental hospital after he publicly associated himself with the International Tribunal into Crimes of Church and State (ITCC) campaign to hold the Crown of England responsible for crimes against children.
He was only released after eight days of campaigning by the ITCC.
Last year, the Justice and Security Act gave the government sweeping new powers to imprison British citizens without a trial.
 It prevents those accused by the government from seeing the evidence against them, or the witness testimony against them. The individual concerned would also be unable to submit evidence – or even enter the courtroom, if it is deemed to be in the court’s interests. In fact, the court will not even have to inform the person concerned of why they have been taken to court, or even that a trial is taking place.
It could mean that the first a person hears of a case against them, is when the police turn up to take them to jail to begin their sentence.
The government claim that secrecy is necessary for “the interests of national security” and added that protection was needed for witnesses involved in giving evidence against the accused.
This latest move, announced by Cameron, represents yet another goose-step into tyranny by a government determined to shy away from any criticism.
EDITORS NOTE:
Would the government really do this? I hear this question asked all the time with some of the stories we cover at the Akashic Times.
In his speech, David Cameron states that although some ‘conspiratorial’ world views may not be acts of terrorism themselves, they could potentially be used as a justification for it.
He goes on to say that the only way therefore to defeat terrorism, is to deal with all forms of it – “not just violent extremism”.
In other words, those who share that world view could be inciting terrorism. I have included the speech made by Cameron here. This is best listened to in full, as it gives a broad picture.
His comments are then further confirmed by Theresa May, who was interviewed by the BBC. She confirms that crucially the law target those people who have not actually committed a crime, but could be ‘inciting’ hatred and therefore may be used for terrorism. That is a very broad definition under UK law.
Essentially what you have is the introduction of a law that targets anyone whose views are considered unsavoury and unacceptable. Under the current law, a crime has to be committed before any action was taken.
Under this new law, that does not have to be the case. It all rests upon the fact that many of these terrorists have been indoctrinated into anti-government views and conspiracy theories such as 9/11 and 7/7 being “a false flag”. This was reiterated by David Cameron in his UN speech. Therefore, anyone who shares and talks about those views, must by defacto also be a terrorist – again highlighted by David Cameron.
Here he also talks about defeating the “ideology of terrorism” and defeating that ideology in all of its forms. This includes the ideology of conspiracy theories. It has to be said there are some weird and offensive conspiracy theories out there that are not based on fact. But if this theory is by the government’s own admission non-violent, then why criminalise it? Particularly, if those who hold such views are not proven members of any terrorist group or organisation.
Finally he admits that although it is argued that it clamps down on free speech, it is necessary to stop the spread of terrorism.
This is a very dangerous leap. For example, if some of those terrorists happened to be socialists, does that mean that anyone else who is also socialist, is a terrorist?
In his speech, David Cameron states that such world views may not be acts of terrorism themselves, but could potentially be used as a justification for it.
After that, he explains that the only way therefore to defeat terrorism, is to deal with all forms of it – “not just violent extremism”.

Research similar stories on Google from here:



Subscribe to BDTN Email Updates:
Enter your email address:


Delivered by FeedBurner
BDTN BREAKING down the NEWS
Site Disclaimer
“If I've left out any information out on this news story or made any mistakes please let us know what other Information you can provide and Please comment below”

Disqus for Ste Matthew Murray

Disqus

Popular posts from this blog

UK Lord Justice wanted age of consent lowered to the age of 4

Lord Justice Fulford was named last year as an adviser to the QueenHe was a key backer of the notorious Paedophile Information Exchange Police suspect the group of abusing children on an ‘industrial scale’He is revealed as a founder member of campaign to defend PIEAt the time it was calling for the age of consent to be lowered to just fourI clashed with Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) global leaders at the Wales conference in Swansea in 1977. Tom O’Carroll is still accepted and active on a sexnet chat group of experts in “sexology” although he writes openly as a pedophile. And the scholarly organizers of the Swansea conference at the University were part of his efforts. Below a summary of my intro to him in my book, Stolen Honor, Stolen Innocence, 2013. This academic pedophile lobby has continued and grown, training second generation and third generation supporters as “scholars” for pedophile equality and “rights.” In 1981 I realized they were global. See the B4UAct conference wi…

Tory MP's Private Company in Charge of Election votes and counts

Tory MP Peter Lilley’s company IDOX was given contracts across Scotland by SNP and Labour councils to quietly privatise the entire electoral process and control of postal votes and election counts across Scotland.


The contracts were awarded to ensure private control of all Scottish elections for the three-year period covering the EU election, the general election, the EU referendum and the Scottish Elections which allow IDOX to control, open, count and put forward "postal" ballot papers to be put into ballot boxes right up to the 10 pm deadline.

By May 2013 IDOX boasted they already had control of elections and voter registration and votes for 13 million people across the UK in the privatisation of all elections that most voters in the UK are completely unaware of.

Does this mean it is possible for postal votes to be binned (if private operators don't agree with the vote provided) and replaced using signatures they store electronically and can ballot papers be made up in pe…

Jill Dando tried to expose BBC paedophile ring but 'nobody wanted to know (including exclusive first look at the new documentary)

MURDERED BBC TV presenter Jill Dando raised the issue of a possible paedophile ring in the corporation - but no action was taken.



A former colleague and friend told us that Miss Dando, from Weston-super-Mare, tried to get bosses to investigate what was going on. The source said that the Crimewatch presenter was told that 'big name stars' and BBC staff were involved in abuse. A file was eventually handed to senior management in the mid-1990s, but no action was taken on the matter.
The source, who remains anonymous, said: “She compiled a file of complaints but she was not really an investigative journalist, just a presenter. “She passed the information to someone else and they gave it back. No one wanted to know.” Miss Dando was shot outside her London home in 1999 at the age of 37.

EXCLUSIVE WATCH THE FIRST FOUR MINUTES OF THE NEW DOCUMENTARY NOW
Justice For Jill