Thoughtcrime

  • slide
  • slide
  • slide

Thoughtcrime

A few days ago, Parliament had a free vote and passed amendment provisions under the Public Order Bill outlawing peaceful protest within buffer zones outside abortion clinics in England and Wales. This makes silent prayer in that vicinity a criminal act.

https://adf.uk/parliament-introduces-thought-crime/

One woman has been arrested twice for this “offence”; the first prior to the amendments being passed into law, for which she was found not guilty, but her most recent case has yet to be tried in court. If the courts work as they should, there should be a trial by jury within which the jurors are bound to pass judgement on the statute itself in respect to the individual case before them. If common sense and decency prevail, they should find her not guilty, but will that actually happen? 

Find out how your MP voted

Whatever your thoughts on abortion or religion, the fact that Parliament saw fit to pass these amendments is a watershed moment in legislative law that attacks not only peaceful and silent protest, but religion and free thought itself.  If we view the rise of wokism combined with political correctness as the precursor to George Orwell’s "newspeak" from 1984 what was supposed to be a tome of fiction starts to resemble a NWO manual that they’re following.  This isn't the first such attack on our future freedoms if we consider the Online Safety Bill that could enable the State to decide in future whether your social media post or blog makes you a criminal, and/or impacts your social scoring score.  Your CBDC wallet could suddenly find itself proverbially a bit lighter than it should be...

As the Blackbelt Barrister discusses in the following YouTube video on thoughtcrime, it is a law that is currently restricted to this certain situation today, but it sets a precedent. What thought processes will be criminalised in future, and with what penalty? The Government has already been willing to demonise people with derogatory labels such as "climate deniers" or "anti-vaxxers" just for refusing to accept their narrative that "the science" is established on these subjects. It is clear that we are being kept in the dark and lied to on a myriad of different situations at present, including climate and COVID jab safety etc. How soon do you think it will be before revealing the truth about these subjects becomes criminalised too?

This is a hugely dangerous precedent that some of our MPs and Parliament have set. We must hope that the Lords, or King Charles III refuse to ratify it as I believe they are duty bound to do under our constitutional rights.  It is a shame that the Blackbelt Barrister clearly doesn't understand the monarch's role in safeguarding the peoples' rights and freedoms in the process of enacting legislature, as he just assumes that King Charles III will automatically sign off on these amendments.  Will this be the first real test of the King's mettle in office?  There are already harassment laws that offenders could be prosecuted under should objectors voice their opinions and grievances in an attempt to intimidate someone. That is sufficient as it stands IMO. Thoughtcrime is most definitely a step too far.

Bear in mind that there are numerous video clips that I have highlighted in the past, of Yuval Noah Harari (chief advisor to Klaus Schwab and the WEF) saying that humans are now hackable. You might think this is fanciful and impossible, but wearable technology combined with the ability to read thoughts could very well achieve this sooner than we think. Harari has already outlined a possible scenario where a State or company leader could establish how well they and their recently delivered speech was received, and by whom. AI can now interpret thoughts, and can construct images of what people have seen (click on picture below to link through to the story) by scanning their brainwaves.

Brain scan images

Whilst some will no doubt argue that it is currently in rather rudimentary form and far from reaching sufficient accuracy for criminalisation purposes, who knows how much further this technology has been developed behind black ops doors, and who decides at what level of accuracy such images are considered incriminating? There is plenty of evidence on the www that brain mapping and the ability to both read and influence thoughts has progressed to levels that have already been used in the field. People are unable to tell whether seeded thoughts are their own or not.  For example, microwave hearing was successfully applied to tell Iraqi soldiers to lay down their weapons in a supposed message from Allah during the Iraq war. 

We must assume that this, and other related technology, can and will be further developed and deployed in future, and potentially by the State against its citizens as this legislation indicates it is willing to do. With Digital Identity in place all this type of data could eventually be added to an individual's personal record. We must be aware of these future possibilities now so that we reject all the "convenience" technology adoptions they'd like us to accept in the near future that we know are coming down the track. There is nothing "convenient" about giving up your freedom and opening yourself to potential restrictions through social scoring.

With this vote, Parliament has stepped further onto the slippery slope towards authoritarian totalitarianism. It is up to us to ensure we don't join them or facilitate our Government’s further advance down this path.

Share:

Related Posts

Theft knows no Boundaries

Theft knows no Boundaries

Who controls farming

Who controls farming

It's a Digital world

It's a Digital world

Be prepared

Be prepared

WHO is Tedros?

WHO is Tedros?

Coronation Chicken

Coronation Chicken

Beware Britcoin

Beware Britcoin

Constitutional Crisis

Constitutional Crisis

Thoughtcrime

Thoughtcrime

Constitutional Law

Constitutional Law