2016 – 023 David Cameron Unveils Plans To Ban Free Speech And Protest

David Cameron Unveils Plans To Ban Free Speech And Protest

Posted by: Neon Nettle  |@NeonNettle
 on 21st May 2015 @ 11.46am

submit to reddit


under the guise of protecting the public from extremism the government proposal will allow police to vet the social media activity

© press

Under the guise of protecting the public from ‘extremism’ the government proposal will allow police to vet the social media activity
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. via AkashictimesThe 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.


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”.

However, these are not the only laws that have been introduced to restrict freedom of speech and liberty. Below, we have covered some of the other  main pieces of legislation that will have a major impact on human rights law and justice in the UK.

Secret courts (not just in family cases)


3 responses to “2016 – 023 David Cameron Unveils Plans To Ban Free Speech And Protest

  1. Can I just place on record, I think David Cameron is a wonderful and honourable man, and I agree with everything he says and does.

  2. Even if it happens you will always get people speaking their minds and standing against oppression. Think of tianamen square or Rosa Parks, even our own poll tax riots. This sham of a government wants to crush human rights laws so it can crush the unions and scrap minimum wage and benefits. If they get their way we’ll be back on 3.00 per hour and be doffing our caps to the rich and privileged being thankful for the scraps they’ll throw to us. The only growth business will be food banks and tent sales because only the rich could afford to buy a house because social housing will be sold off. This isn’t scaremongering it’s happening now, look around you. A revolution can only be around the corner and the sooner the better. If this rant means I will now be monitored for speaking my mind then so be it. If standing up for what’s right makes me on a par with terrorists then that just shows how twisted and power mad these Tory bastards are.

    • Mick Greenhough

      Its worse than that. TTIP will allow US Corporates to buy up the NHS with unlimited fines if our gov try to stop them paying below the minimum wage. see 2014 – 051 Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) see As indicated on Tuesday this is a YouTube about family break-down in EU Member States in Eastern and Central Europe due to free movement of labour. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmaaBxBBUiw

      EU also intends to stop Collective Bargaining and also to be sole funder of political parties so Unions will no longer be allowed to fund Labour.

      I live on eastate of 72 flats with garages. Insecure garages have been occupied by men from Eastern and Central Europe. They occupy these garages and leave excrement and urine in plastic bottles around the garages and close by. There are young children on the Estate and for them this is a serious health risk apart from those of us who have to clean up. We ‘persuade’ landlords to secure their garages by threatening court action or illeggally doing that ourselves etc. Garages are left in a disgusting and obscene unhealthy mess with dumped urine soaked mattresses etc.

      As acting chairman of Estate committtee I’ve asked these men to move on at same time as saying “I sympothyse with their situation. Police have been called in to assist to tell these EU citizens to move on. That is the only power the police have.

      The murderer from Latvia who then killed a 13 year old girl from Hanwell lived in a broken down house opposite the Estate and may also have used these garages. He hanged himself in a park close by.

      These people are not here to pick strawberries they are here to undercut wages formally agreed by collective barganing. They are not immigrants.

      We in the labour movement have come the an analogy that if there is a surplus of apples the price. The market place of labour within thed Single European Market consists of human beings not objects. Thisee who use the analogy are in favour of the ‘race to the bottom’, trade unions are not.

      Regards to all



      Secretary CAEF

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.