at still love freedom!
Freedom of Religion
All posts tagged Freedom of Religion
‘The Online Safety Bill, the most far-reaching online censorship law to ever be proposed in the UK, has been presented to Parliament.
UK Digital, Culture, Media, and Sport (DCMS) Secretary of State Nadine Dorries, said her aim with the bill was to “make the internet, in the UK, the safest place in the world for children and vulnerable young people to go online.”
However, as with many bills that are positioned as a way to keep children safe, this Online Safety Bill contains sweeping speech restrictions that will affect all UK internet users.
The bill requires Big Tech companies to take action against “priority legal but harmful” content which will be decided by the government. The DCMS Secretary of State has the power to add more categories of priority legal but harmful content via secondary legislation in the future.
According to the Financial Times, this secondary legislation “requires less scrutiny from MPs [Members of Parliament] than the original bill.”
Companies are also required to report “emerging harms” to the UK’s communications regulator, the Office of Communications (Ofcom).
Additionally, the Online Safety Bill outlaws sending “knowingly false” communications that are sent “with the intention to cause non-trivial emotional, psychological or physical harm,” requires large social media companies to introduce identity verification tools, gives Ofcom the power to force companies to use “better and more effective” proactive content moderation technology, tasks Big Tech with determining which of its advertisers are pushing scams, mandates that any website hosting pornography put “robust checks in place to ensure that users are 18 years old or over,” and more.
UK citizens who are found guilty of offenses under the Online Safety Bill can be imprisoned or fined.
Not only does the Online Safety Bill contain numerous provisions that can be used to silence UK citizens and punish them for their online speech but powerful “recognised media outlets” are exempt from any regulation in the bill. Some of the outlets that will be getting special carveouts under this bill have even been praised by politicians for pushing for stronger “online safety” laws.
Tech platforms already remove millions of “harmful” posts each quarter and if this bill becomes law, they’ll have an even stronger incentive to censor.
The punishments for companies that fail to censor enough under the Online Safety Bill include having their sites blocked and being hit with multi-billion dollar fines worth up to 10% of their annual turnover. Tech company executives can also be jailed if they fail to cooperate with Ofcom’s information requests.
Despite introducing strong punishments for tech companies that don’t remove enough harmful content, the Online Safety Bill has yet to reveal the categories of legal the harmful content that tech companies will have to target under this bill.
Earlier this week, Dorries said large platforms will be required to remove legal but harmful content “if it is already banned in their own terms and conditions.”
Yet today’s UK government press release for the Online Safety Bill says that the categories of legal but harmful content will be “set by the government and approved by Parliament.” The press release also lists “exposure to self-harm, harassment and eating disorders” as examples of harmful content that online platforms will be required to remove.
The introduction of the Online Safety Bill to Parliament is the first stage of its legislative journey.
Numerous UK rights groups have blasted the Online Safety Bill and warned that it will restrict free speech.
“The Online Safety Bill is set to rip up the rule book as far as traditional British free speech standards are concerned,” Mark Johnson, Legal and Policy Officer at civil liberties group Big Brother Watch, said. “This is a censor’s charter that will give state backing to big tech censorship on a scale that we have never seen before.”
Toby Young, General Secretary of the Free Speech Union, warned that the bill will have a “chilling effect on free speech.”
“We are particularly concerned that the government has said it will force social media platforms to remove ‘legal but harmful’ content, including ‘harassment,’” Young added. “That will enable political activists and interest groups claiming to speak on behalf of disadvantaged groups to silence their opponents by branding any views they disagree with as ‘harassment.’”
Matthew Lesh, Head of Public Policy at the think tank Institute of Economic Affairs said: “The UK threatening tech executives with jail time is eerily similar to how Russia and other authoritarian countries are currently behaving. It is an attack on free speech and entrepreneurialism.”
Before the bill was presented to Parliament, the UK’s main opposition party, the Labour Party, suggested that it would offer little obstruction to the Online Safety Bill and complained that it hadn’t been introduced fast enough.
Last October, Labour Leader Keir Starmer lamented that it has been “three years since the government promised an Online Safety Bill. Starmer also claimed that “the damage caused by harmful content online is worse than ever” and promised to support the bill if its second reading was brought forward to the end of 2021.
More recently, Labour Member of Parliament (MP) and Shadow Culture Secretary Lucy Powell said that Labour supports “the principles of the bill that is finally being published” and claimed that “delay up to this point has come with significant cost.”’https://reclaimthenet.org/uk-online-safety-bill-censorship-parliament/
‘Fast food chain Pizza Hut has produced a training program for teachers that claims to “promote awareness, respect, and empathy for different lived experiencing,” arguing that “everyone has as racial identity.”
In one pamphlet produced by the program, toddlers express racist views, arguing that “Children as young as three-years-old begin to show evidence of societal messages affecting how they feel about themselves or their group identity — this is the beginning of internalized superiority or internalized oppression.”
The program is similar to Coca Cola’s anti-white online training program that instructed its employees to “be less white,” which faced a massive public backlash on social media.
The program, developed by Pizza Hut and First Book, is a “series of resources designed to support educators in helping their students engage in effective, courageous conversations about race and social justice,” and boasts that it is “informed by leading anti-bias, antiracist (ABAR) experts.”
The guide aims to teach educators that “racism exists within and beyond schools and communities of learning,” arguing that “the myth of racial hierarchy remains a dominant part of America’s culture.”
“Acts of violence against black communities are often identified on social media by the hashtag #BlackLivesMatter,” the program suggests.
As detailed by Daily Wire, a pamphlet titled “Empowering Educators: A Guidebook on Race and Racism” claims that “The Empowering Educators Guidebook provides support for educators seeking to increase their personal awareness of race and racism, as well as direction on how to ground learning environments through inclusive curriculum and diverse, affirming literature.”
The Daily Wire reports:
The pamphlet refers to America’s history of systemic racism as it talks about the death of George Floyd: “Floyd’s murder, along with other acts of violence against Black men and women leading up to and after his death, spurred global protests as America continues to reckon with its history of police brutality and systemic racism.”
It continues by arguing, “Many antiracist experts note that racism in America is not perpetuated by ‘bad’ people. Rather, racism is maintained by laws, policies, and normalized practices that are upheld consciously and unconsciously by those who knowingly or unknowingly benefit from them,” adding, “Although many people don’t engage in individual acts of racism, they still benefit from racist policies, practices, and social norms.”
It champions the “reality” of intersectionality, writing, “A person who is Black and female, for example, experiences discrimination and disadvantage differently than a person who is White and female. This concept of intersectionality was coined in 1989 by Dr. Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw. She describes how a person’s social identities such as race, class, and gender coincide to create overlapping systems of disadvantage. When developing your awareness, it is important to acknowledge this reality for students, families, and colleagues.”‘https://www.rebelnews.com/pizza_hut_urges_teachers_to_watch_out_for_racist_toddlers?utm_campaign=rb_03_08_2022&utm_medium=email&utm_source=therebel
‘The Dhillon Law Group, Inc. (@dhillonlaw) has filed suit against Mater Academy on behalf of Nicolas Ortiz, a 14-year-old student, for targeting and discriminating against him for his Christian beliefs.
Ortiz, a practicing Christian, regularly brings his bible to school to read during his free time. For this activity, the complaint alleges that Ortiz has regularly been ostracized and targeted for his beliefs by fellow students, staff, and school administrators.
The complaint also alleges that school offices broke Florida law by repeatedly ignoring Ortiz’s parents requests for inquiries into their son’s bullying.
The complaint shows examples of this harassment including students planning to physically assault him, a science teacher humiliating him for his faith in front of his peers in a classroom setting, and his peers creating false and defamatory statements claiming that he was planning a school shooting to disparage him.
“Mr. Ortiz is experiencing something that no American should ever have to experience, said Dhillon Law Group managing partner, Harmeet K. Dhillon (@pnjaban). “It’s bad enough that the school has done nothing to stop the bullying from his peers, but have gone as far as joining in on targeting Mr. Ortiz for simply practicing his faith. This is blatant violation of his first amendment rights is another example of how extreme so many in our education system have become, and why Dhillon Law Group is coming to Mr. Ortiz’s defense.”
Ortiz was given the maximum allowed punishment of a 10-day suspension for the fabricated allegations that he threatened a school shooting.
“Imagine being falsely accused of threatening to shoot up a school. Law enforcement concluded that he was being pranked by fellow students, but that did not stop numerous parents from spreading the false accusation online,” said Dhillon Law Group partner, Matthew Sarelson (@MSarelson). “The students who spread the false accusations against Mr. Ortiz were never disciplined in any way. Only Mr. Ortiz was suspended, without due process and for no valid reason.”
Mr. Ortiz and his parents are seeking significant damages because the school has destroyed his educational experience.’https://www.dhillonlaw.com/lawsuits/miami-student-sues-school-for-discrimination-for-christian-beliefs/
The complaint filed may be downloaded here https://2fxq9y25b9ub11b2g545smj0-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Ortiz-Complaint-and-Exhibits.pdf
With an Australian Federal election coming sometime in May the following is a must read. ‘Comrade Albo and his buddy Adam Bandt are two red peas in a pod, and their younger years as spotty faced commies are all the evidence one needs to be convinced.
As reported by James Morrow this week, a young Anthony Albanese participated in a forum with the official magazine of the Communist Party of Australia (CPA) nearly 18 months after the Berlin Wall fell and the horrors of the Marxist political system were exposed.
The interview, which appeared in the April 3, 1991 edition of the Communist Party’s house organ Tribune, was part of a feature called “The changing Left – coherence, theory”.
Albanese was included as one of a number of figures who were asked by the paper to “respond to a series of propositions and to each other” and admitted it was easier to take potshots from opposition because “being in government confronts the labour movement as a whole, not just the Labor Party, with questions which the Left failed to consider … how Labor puts its principles into action, how we deal with questions of the internationalisation of capital.”
“It’s easier to construct a vision of an antinuclear society or an environmentally aware society or one based on equality,” he said.
As well as running the interview with Mr Albanese, the same edition of Tribune ran a classified ad promoting an upcoming “politics in the pub” talk involving the future Opposition Leader entitled, “Socialist Politics: Past Tense, Future Prospects.
Why did comrade Albo get so much attention in far-left circles back then?
Well in the early 1990s Mr Albanese led a faction known as the “Hard Left” which had close ties to communist organisations, and even his own buddies admit it. In a November 2000 article by future Labor frontbencher Andrew Leigh, the Hard Left was described as being “led by Anthony Albanese”.
“This group was more concerned than the Soft Left with international issues and maintained closer links with broader left-wing groups such as the Communist Party of Australia,” he wrote.
If you thought that was bad, Greens leader Adam Bandt’s earlier years are even more concerning.
In a two-page memo written back in 1995 while he was a student politician at Murdoch University, Bandt said he was “towards an anti-capitalist, anti-social democratic, internationalist movement”.
If that’s not a communist, what is?
Identifying himself as a member of the Left Alliance, Mr Bandt said, “the parliamentary road to socialism is non-existent”. He called the Greens a “bourgeois” party but said supporting them might be the most effective strategy.
“Communists can’t fetishise alternative political parties but should always make some kind of materially based assessment about the effectiveness of any given strategy come election time,” he wrote in the 1995 memo.
Although we all said and did stupid things when we are younger, all this points to something far more sinister… For decades now, each-way Albo and Adam Bandt have been lingering around hardcore communist organisations even after the unspeakable horrors of Stalinist Russia, Maoist China and Pol Pot’s Cambodia were revealed in full colour to the world.’https://www.advanceaustralia.org.au/comrades_albo_and_his_buddy_adam_bandt_two_red_peas_in_a_pod
The LNP may just be a little better than Labor or Greens but to give us our freedoms back put Labor, Greens and LNP last.
‘Jordan Hall, Baptist pastor and publisher of popular conservative news site, sued for libel by transgender lobbyist
State’s left-wing legal establishment & well-funded LGBT “lawfare” mob seek to stop site’s influential voice
Far-left Judge to hold preliminary hearing Feb. 16 to determine whether pastor is a “dangerous person”
Pastor Jordan Hall with his wife and five children.
A conservative pastor who is the publisher of Montana’s largest and most influential conservative news site is being sued for “libel” by a bizarre transgender lobbyist. The leftist judge assigned to the case is also threatening the pastor with fines and a gag order even before the trial takes place.
This assault on free speech and free press is buttressed by the state’s far-left legal establishment and appears to be funded by the wealthy LGBT and Planned Parenthood lobby. The aggressive legal action, including an invasive “discovery” process of the pastor’s media operation, is clearly aimed to put the conservative news site and its subsidiary voices out of business. The radicals would even like to dictate what the pastor may say in his own church.’ For the entire article go to https://newpatriotsblog.com/
There MUST be a change in government this May and that does not include the LNP, ALP, Greens or those Leftist Independents but it does mean parties such as the UAP, One Nation and Liberal Democrats!
The Victorian government under Dan Andrews is nothing short of being an arm of the CCP. All Australians, in fact all freedom loving people need to view this video.
whatyareckon 