All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 5, 2024 - David Icke
13:10
Free Speech Vs Censorship - David Icke
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
I am here to bring light.
It's about healing.
you Mind, body, soul.
Don't ever settle.
Find your purpose.
Find the answers.
Don't hold back.
Achieve maximum success.
Book with me if you want to live.
Available now.
Available now.
you We've got two final stories to run through, both of which are very much connected to do with censorship, which we've touched on.
So Ofcom in the UK are obviously the media regulator that was initiated by Tony Blair in 1999, I believe, to regulate media coverage.
They're supposed to ensure there's balance in debates and impartiality and so on, which they don't do.
But their powers have been extended to include the internet, social media, and video-on-demand channels, like Iconic, although they've left us alone to date.
We've seen with the riots in the last few weeks, the increase in their powers again.
And Stalmas basically said in that speech, they're going to be given even more.
Yeah.
And they're going to start wielding them around.
And with that, the same week, the French arrest the Telegram CEO, which is another blatant attack on censorship.
So what do you see here?
Well, I mean, what I would say about Ofcom is it's a wonderful example of how the cult plans long, long, long in advance.
So, it wasn't just that Tony Blair, when he was Prime Minister, created Ofcom.
It was that he would have known, because when he opens his mouth the cult is speaking, where it was planned to go.
And his protégé, basically, has come in, Starmer, now, to take it to that level that Blair would have known it was being created to go to.
You mentioned they expanded it under the Tories, because it's a one-party state, it's just a matter of speed, so that it encompassed the internet, because they created the internet Because the internet is controllable.
And they didn't have censorship before because they had to get people on the internet, dependent upon the internet, etc.
And once that point had been reached, then the censorship started because they thought, well, they can't go back now.
Realistically, it was Ofcom that got you banned in 2020.
It would have been that organisation, almost certainly, behind that.
Yeah.
And, you know, like I say, Trump was president then, not Biden.
Biden just continued it.
But this is the story.
Ofcom, given the right to censor social media posts in proposals put forward after UK riots, a think tank, I'll come to that in a second.
A think tank has proposed that the regulator should be able to step in to minimise the spread of misinformation online.
Now, this regulator, Ofcom, censored people warning about the effects of the fake vaccine and warning about many other things to do with Covid, all of which have turned out to be true.
So what Ofcom was doing was systematically denying the Nuremberg right to inform consent to medical procedures by making sure that they only saw the government version, which turned out to be a pack of bloody lies.
So now we're being asked to accept One of the great misinformation censorship operations, certainly in Britain, that denied people the right to consent has been proved to be absolutely wrong.
But now it's going to become the arbiter of misinformation and disinformation.
It's a joke.
Dame Melody Dawes, who's a career bureaucrat and government gopher who's the head of Ofcom, should be deeply ashamed, but she won't be at what she's done.
And her organisation has done.
So Ofcom could be given emergency powers which would allow censoring of social media posts in an effort to tackle misinformation online following riots that swept across the UK earlier this month.
Right.
Here's another point.
This is how the whole thing is so controlled.
Even the Tory party, the Conservative party, and many people even quite close to Rishi Sunak, were shocked when he called an election on July the 4th, because it made no electoral sense.
It was obvious he was going to get slaughtered, and he could have gone on for longer.
Why did he do that?
Well, because the cult has a time scale, it has a timeline, and the time was to get their man in on steroids, Starmer, to start the next stage.
Sunak, call an election. Yes, sir. And so that's how the whole thing works. And then,
almost immediately, you have riots in the streets, which gives him the opportunity,
problem-reaction-solution, to go down the road of even more censorship, which is the
cult agenda that owns him.
This is what's happening.
So, following a discussion with government officials in the Metropolitan Police's counter-terrorism unit, the Centre for Countering Digital Hate Digital Hate, I call it, it's more accurate, has proposed that the regulator should be, Ofcom, should be given the power to step in to diminish harmful posts online.
Now, what is the Centre for Countering Digital Hate?
It's an organisation created by Labour Party activists.
It's headed by a Labour activist called Imran Ahmed, and another creator was Morgan McSweeney, who is the closest aide of... Keir Starmer.
Keir Starmer.
It's a joke, and what you're going to see is this Imran Ahmed and this countering digital hate, which operates in America.
It's a transatlantic organisation now.
You're going to see this have more and more and more impact on government policy, and another organization called Hope Not Hate, which I call Hate Not Hope, is again more accurate.
The head of Hope Not Hate, did a post during the riots in which he said that he'd heard that a Muslim woman had been attacked with acid.
It was nonsense.
It didn't happen.
The police said it didn't happen.
Where's his trial?
Exactly.
Nowhere.
Nowhere.
He just got away with it while other people who said far less explosive things in terms of reaction...
are in jail. They also admitted the day after that big list of protest
days was going to come out and cities across the country, loads of people came out,
they admitted they released that. Yeah. So that was all fake. Yeah. And isn't it amazing that all
those people came out like anti-hate protesters on the same night that all that was supposed to
happen. They got all the publicity for it, etc. It's all a bloody scam. And so what we're
looking at is a A long-planned series of events that are now playing out.
And, you know, I call it Fear Blitzkrieg.
We're going to be hit by so many things in these coming months because they want to break our spirit.
That's so important.
That will be the bloody day.
And then we've got this thing.
I love this.
And, you know, this is another example, Jay, of how You know, Kissinger had this doctrine, my enemy's enemy is my friend.
In other words, you don't matter how bad they are, as long as they do something that I agree with, I'll kind of support them.
And I've been seeing people in the so-called alternative media this week talking about, oh, maybe we should move to the United Arab Emirates.
Because the UAE has suspended a deal to buy fighter jets from France because of the Telegram CEO's arrest in France over his platform.
It's like, oh well, that's good, you know, they're standing up for free speech.
And then you look at the United Arab Emirates' background.
Here's just one story.
How the UAE crushes dissent by arbitrarily revoking citizenship.
This alarming trend reflects a deliberate effort to forcibly silence activists while violating a wide range of human rights.
The UAE's most concealed and favoured tool for punishing and suppressing political dissent has long been the revocation of citizenship from those who dare to criticise the government.
And it's like...
They're standing up for free speech because they've stopped the planes being sold or bought because of the Telegram CEO.
I mean, it's a joke!
And what you've got is all these people who are absolutely the opposite, through their record, coming out and doing something that is apparently in favour of free speech and freedom.
They have no interest in freedom whatsoever.
So this is the point.
We need to ask the question, who benefits and why are they doing it?
They obviously don't believe in it, so why are they doing it?
And these are the subtleties and the nuances that a proper alternative mind is always looking at, always asking about.
Whereas a programmed, fake alternative mind sees everything in black and white.
Yeah, it's basically being a grown-up when you look at things.
Because when the government do something, people look at it from a, okay, they're doing this.
Why are they doing this?
What's being done?
As soon as somebody does something that they like, you don't apply that same logic to it, which is okay, great, they're doing that, but why?
So like, you know, we've had this conversation before, like, okay, must support Twitter.
Great.
You're back on Twitter.
You weren't before.
Okay, we'll take that.
Fantastic.
But what else are you doing?
And why are you doing it?
You can use things to your advantage, but understand that ultimately, they're not there for a good reason.
It's like I've said so many times, never judge a situation by the situation in the moment.
Yeah, absolutely.
Look at where it's leading.
That's where you find the answers.
And people like Musk and the purchase of TwitterX, he is leading the opposition to the dystopia, to the edge of the cliff on behalf of the dystopia.
▲
Export Selection