Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

Возникла проблема при загрузке этого видео. Это может быть связано с временными проблемами сети или видео может быть недоступно.

На главную

This case was never about democracy, public safety, or justice. It’s about the British state using the courts to police culture, criminalise dissent, & decide which voices are acceptable. When prosecutors keep returning to a case that has already fallen, it raises serious questions about motive, not merit. Today... show more

John Finucane MP

51,776 subscribers

27,362 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Искусство Новости и политика

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

This is not about whether or not you are a fan of Aidan Kearney. This is about a state police unit that is using their power to silence someone who wanted to get the truth about the Karen Read trial out. And that is a scary world to live in if the people who are in charge with guns and badges are able to get away with that.

This is not about whether or not you are a fan of Aidan Kearney. This is about a state police unit that is using their power to silence someone who wanted to get the truth about the Karen Read trial out. And that is a scary world to live in if the people who are in charge with guns and badges are able to get away with that.

Emily See

36,481 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад

🚨 FREE SPEECH UNDER THREAT IN CANADA A Western government is now openly talking about restricting access to foreign platforms because citizens are speaking in ways the authorities don’t like. When governments decide which opinions are acceptable… when they label dissent as “harm”… when they frame speech itself as a security threat… That is not protection. That is control. The moment a state claims the power to decide what its population is allowed to hear, read, or say — democracy itself is weakened. Citizens raising concerns about immigration, culture, or national identity are not criminals. They are participants in public debate. Free societies do not silence disagreement. They tolerate it — even when it is uncomfortable. Because once censorship begins, it never stays limited to one issue. The real question now is simple: Who decides what is “acceptable speech” — the people, or the government?

🚨 FREE SPEECH UNDER THREAT IN CANADA A Western government is now openly talking about restricting access to foreign platforms because citizens are speaking in ways the authorities don’t like. When governments decide which opinions are acceptable… when they label dissent as “harm”… when they frame speech itself as a security threat… That is not protection. That is control. The moment a state claims the power to decide what its population is allowed to hear, read, or say — democracy itself is weakened. Citizens raising concerns about immigration, culture, or national identity are not criminals. They are participants in public debate. Free societies do not silence disagreement. They tolerate it — even when it is uncomfortable. Because once censorship begins, it never stays limited to one issue. The real question now is simple: Who decides what is “acceptable speech” — the people, or the government?

Jim Ferguson

147,157 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

When hate speech cases were already being addressed under existing laws, the need for a separate Hate Speech Bill raises serious questions. The Indian Constitution and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita already provide safeguards while guaranteeing the Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression under Article 19(1)(a). The concern is not about protecting hatred, but about intent — is this law meant to protect a specific community, or to silence Hindutva voices? In a democracy, laws must restrain hate, not ideology or belief !

When hate speech cases were already being addressed under existing laws, the need for a separate Hate Speech Bill raises serious questions. The Indian Constitution and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita already provide safeguards while guaranteeing the Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression under Article 19(1)(a). The concern is not about protecting hatred, but about intent — is this law meant to protect a specific community, or to silence Hindutva voices? In a democracy, laws must restrain hate, not ideology or belief !

Meenakshi Sehrawat

11,441 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад

It is shameful that I asked this Government six serious questions on the war in Iran, and not a single one was answered. This feeble and discredited Government may be disintegrating, but that does not give Ministers the right to duck serious questions about Britain’s standing in the world, or the safety of British nationals living in the Middle East.

It is shameful that I asked this Government six serious questions on the war in Iran, and not a single one was answered. This feeble and discredited Government may be disintegrating, but that does not give Ministers the right to duck serious questions about Britain’s standing in the world, or the safety of British nationals living in the Middle East.

Priti Patel MP

14,462 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Psi shares what he thinks about artists liking Mild’s posts in which Pi Scott spoke out about the case. #ทรายสก๊อต “I think this is an important lesson about the influence these people have. They need to understand that they cannot act as if their voices carry no weight. This case is something very serious, and when you like a post about the property dispute instead of focusing on something more serious, which is rape, it reflects, at this moment, what is most important to them: possessions. Material possessions seem to hold more value than what is right. This is something that should lead them to reflect on themselves.”

Psi shares what he thinks about artists liking Mild’s posts in which Pi Scott spoke out about the case. #ทรายสก๊อต “I think this is an important lesson about the influence these people have. They need to understand that they cannot act as if their voices carry no weight. This case is something very serious, and when you like a post about the property dispute instead of focusing on something more serious, which is rape, it reflects, at this moment, what is most important to them: possessions. Material possessions seem to hold more value than what is right. This is something that should lead them to reflect on themselves.”

BoysLove Hub ENG

245,149 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

Scott MacFarlane on the FBI raid of Sen. Lucas’s home and office: There are going to be questions raised about how Fox News was there as the raid was undertaken. That type of thing is rare. I’ve covered the FBI for a lot of years and the Department of Justice for a lot of years—you don’t get advance warning of raids, in part because it’s viewed that it could put people in jeopardy, either the people being raided or the raiders. What’s more, it is prescribed in the Justice Manual: you do not give the media advance warning of a search unless it has high levels of approval. This has happened before, but in this case it clearly had a high level of approval. But look at the Justice Manual, then look at the images on the screen—you can see those two are not connected. What’s more, it really is telling that the Department of Justice is trying to take a megaphone to blast out this search. It’s clearly a political rival of the president’s. What’s more, they’re blasting this out while they keep behind closed doors what’s happening with the Epstein files. Howard Lutnick’s interview is behind closed doors, and there’s been no action by the Department of Justice to hear or amplify the voices of Epstein survivors.

Scott MacFarlane on the FBI raid of Sen. Lucas’s home and office: There are going to be questions raised about how Fox News was there as the raid was undertaken. That type of thing is rare. I’ve covered the FBI for a lot of years and the Department of Justice for a lot of years—you don’t get advance warning of raids, in part because it’s viewed that it could put people in jeopardy, either the people being raided or the raiders. What’s more, it is prescribed in the Justice Manual: you do not give the media advance warning of a search unless it has high levels of approval. This has happened before, but in this case it clearly had a high level of approval. But look at the Justice Manual, then look at the images on the screen—you can see those two are not connected. What’s more, it really is telling that the Department of Justice is trying to take a megaphone to blast out this search. It’s clearly a political rival of the president’s. What’s more, they’re blasting this out while they keep behind closed doors what’s happening with the Epstein files. Howard Lutnick’s interview is behind closed doors, and there’s been no action by the Department of Justice to hear or amplify the voices of Epstein survivors.

Acyn

362,387 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

Police in uniform barged into our office and started pushing staff, heckling them, assaulting them and threatening them. Is this Democracy? Is this good governance? What Kolkata Police did today is deeply disturbing. The use of State machinery raises serious questions about legality, due process and abuse of power. If the police are being used at the behest of the BJP West Bengal government to target political opponents, the courts must intervene. Democracy cannot survive when State power becomes an instrument of political intimidation.

Police in uniform barged into our office and started pushing staff, heckling them, assaulting them and threatening them. Is this Democracy? Is this good governance? What Kolkata Police did today is deeply disturbing. The use of State machinery raises serious questions about legality, due process and abuse of power. If the police are being used at the behest of the BJP West Bengal government to target political opponents, the courts must intervene. Democracy cannot survive when State power becomes an instrument of political intimidation.

All India Trinamool Congress

14,810 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

In 2002, Kenyans stood up and declared that the era of President Daniel arap Moi had come to an end. The political establishment was powerful, the state machinery was intact, but the people were stronger. The people won. In 2027, Kenya faces another defining moment. This is not about politicians. It is not about tribes. It is not about personalities. It is about the sovereign will of the people. When citizens unite behind a common cause, no amount of power, money, propaganda, or intimidation can stand in their way. Governments derive their authority from the people, and when the people decide it is time for change, change becomes inevitable. 2002 was a Moi Must Go moment. 2027 will be remembered as a moment when Kenyans once again demonstrated that ultimate power belongs to the people. The people are supreme. The people are the employers. The people are the final authority. And when the people speak with one voice, history listens.

In 2002, Kenyans stood up and declared that the era of President Daniel arap Moi had come to an end. The political establishment was powerful, the state machinery was intact, but the people were stronger. The people won. In 2027, Kenya faces another defining moment. This is not about politicians. It is not about tribes. It is not about personalities. It is about the sovereign will of the people. When citizens unite behind a common cause, no amount of power, money, propaganda, or intimidation can stand in their way. Governments derive their authority from the people, and when the people decide it is time for change, change becomes inevitable. 2002 was a Moi Must Go moment. 2027 will be remembered as a moment when Kenyans once again demonstrated that ultimate power belongs to the people. The people are supreme. The people are the employers. The people are the final authority. And when the people speak with one voice, history listens.

𝙋𝘼𝙐𝙇. 𝐎. 𝐍𝐄𝐊𝐎

24,317 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

🚨 A Hamilton police officer is heading to trial following allegations of using excessive force against a handcuffed man. Internal investigations reportedly found violations of prisoner handling protocols, and special prosecutors are now involved as the case moves forward. ⚖️ The incident, captured on video, is raising serious questions about accountability and justice. Is this fair policing—or a misuse of authority? 🤔

🚨 A Hamilton police officer is heading to trial following allegations of using excessive force against a handcuffed man. Internal investigations reportedly found violations of prisoner handling protocols, and special prosecutors are now involved as the case moves forward. ⚖️ The incident, captured on video, is raising serious questions about accountability and justice. Is this fair policing—or a misuse of authority? 🤔

THE BOLD VOICE

91,736 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

One year ago, when I first stood on the steps of the Magistrates’ Court surrounded by cameras, I said this case would become a platform to expose Zionism and the realities surrounding it. Today, that is exactly what has happened. In open court, under oath and on the public record, discussions were heard about the history of Zionism, political violence, terrorism, the broader geopolitical context of Palestine, and the distinction between legitimate political debate designed to silence dissent. The same system that tried to criminalise political speech has now been forced to examine the very ideology and historical context they wanted quarantined from public discussion. For over a year, I have faced prosecution, media attacks, censorship, threats, financial destruction, and relentless pressure simply for speaking passionately about Palestine and opposing injustice. Yet despite all of that, we did not bow down. This was never just about me. This was always about protecting the right to speak, protest, resist intimidation, and stand for oppressed people without fear. Win, lose, or draw, history will remember who stood firm when it mattered most. Palestine will never be silenced.

One year ago, when I first stood on the steps of the Magistrates’ Court surrounded by cameras, I said this case would become a platform to expose Zionism and the realities surrounding it. Today, that is exactly what has happened. In open court, under oath and on the public record, discussions were heard about the history of Zionism, political violence, terrorism, the broader geopolitical context of Palestine, and the distinction between legitimate political debate designed to silence dissent. The same system that tried to criminalise political speech has now been forced to examine the very ideology and historical context they wanted quarantined from public discussion. For over a year, I have faced prosecution, media attacks, censorship, threats, financial destruction, and relentless pressure simply for speaking passionately about Palestine and opposing injustice. Yet despite all of that, we did not bow down. This was never just about me. This was always about protecting the right to speak, protest, resist intimidation, and stand for oppressed people without fear. Win, lose, or draw, history will remember who stood firm when it mattered most. Palestine will never be silenced.

Hash Tayeh

22,162 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

#WATCH | Delhi: On AAP national convener Arvind Kejriwal's letter to Delhi High Court Chief Justice, Sacchin Puri, Advocate & Vice President Of Delhi High Court Bar Association says, "I believe that this is not correct. It is politicising the entire issue. The judgment has come. If you don't agree with the judgment, you have a remedy to appeal or revision or as the case may be. But to issue this kind of a letter in which you are acknowledging the fact that I have a right to appeal and without prejudice, I'm writing this to those rights, then you are taking the system on and saying today that you are bringing the prestige of the system down. It is not acceptable. There was no reason for such a letter to be posted in the public domain. You had a right which was right to appeal or revision. You should have exercised that. This is only scandalising the entire issue and trying to put pressure indirectly or directly on the judicial system."

#WATCH | Delhi: On AAP national convener Arvind Kejriwal's letter to Delhi High Court Chief Justice, Sacchin Puri, Advocate & Vice President Of Delhi High Court Bar Association says, "I believe that this is not correct. It is politicising the entire issue. The judgment has come. If you don't agree with the judgment, you have a remedy to appeal or revision or as the case may be. But to issue this kind of a letter in which you are acknowledging the fact that I have a right to appeal and without prejudice, I'm writing this to those rights, then you are taking the system on and saying today that you are bringing the prestige of the system down. It is not acceptable. There was no reason for such a letter to be posted in the public domain. You had a right which was right to appeal or revision. You should have exercised that. This is only scandalising the entire issue and trying to put pressure indirectly or directly on the judicial system."

ANI

46,793 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

AGAIN, WESTERN DIPLOMATS, POLITICIANS MISLEAD THE WORLD OVER A HONG KONG TRIAL Western journalists and politicians are pushing out reports that two Hong Kong people have been found “guilty of incitement of subversion for commemorating the Tiananmen Square massacre”. Except… that were NOT found guilty of that. The trial wasn't about that. Here’s what really happened. Three people were arrested for conspiracy to overthrow the government by incitement to subversion. One pleaded guilty. The other two were found guilty on Friday. . PRETTY SMART Now Hong Kong judges are pretty smart, and realized the case would be misreported. So they released a 216-page document describing what the trial was actually about, and was it was NOT about. It said the trial was NOT about June 4 vigils or acts of remembrance. This trial was NOT about freedom of expression or assembly. This trial was NOT about human rights. This trial was NOT about suppression of anything. The trial was about one thing only. One of the trio pleaded guilty to incitement to subversion to overthrow the government. Did the evidence show the other two were also guilty? That’s all. . TWISTING THE TALE Of course, western journalists and diplomats did their usual thing. They didn’t attend the trial nor did they read the judgment. They just ignored the facts, and said: - It’s about vigils and acts of remembrance, innit? [clip] - It’s about freedom of expression and assembly, innit? [clip] - It’s about human rights, innit? [clip] - It’s about suppression, innit? [clip] (Sorry, that’s my attempt to do a London accent!) So Western journalists and diplomats are lying to the world – as usual. . ARE HONG KONG COURTS FAIR? Some reporters say anti-China campaigners cannot win in the Hong Kong courts—to which I reply that that’s not true—a Hong Kong court ruled in favor of one of these same defendants in a 2022 trial. And to US reporters who say Hong Kong has turned lawless—I’ll just point out that Hong Kong scores HIGHER on global legal rankings than the United States does. . THAT ALL-IMPORTANT CONTEXT Meanwhile, what do you get for trying to overthrow the UK government? The maximum sentence is life imprisonment. What about trying to overthrow the US government? 20 years, or life imprisonment or the death penalty for treason if a foreign enemy is involved. Trying to overthrow the Indian government is considered: an offense against the state, and the punishment is imprisonment for life, or they just put you to death. I could go on, but you get the point. The west is always trying to demonize the east. Let’s not be fooled. Stay open-minded. Peace.

AGAIN, WESTERN DIPLOMATS, POLITICIANS MISLEAD THE WORLD OVER A HONG KONG TRIAL Western journalists and politicians are pushing out reports that two Hong Kong people have been found “guilty of incitement of subversion for commemorating the Tiananmen Square massacre”. Except… that were NOT found guilty of that. The trial wasn't about that. Here’s what really happened. Three people were arrested for conspiracy to overthrow the government by incitement to subversion. One pleaded guilty. The other two were found guilty on Friday. . PRETTY SMART Now Hong Kong judges are pretty smart, and realized the case would be misreported. So they released a 216-page document describing what the trial was actually about, and was it was NOT about. It said the trial was NOT about June 4 vigils or acts of remembrance. This trial was NOT about freedom of expression or assembly. This trial was NOT about human rights. This trial was NOT about suppression of anything. The trial was about one thing only. One of the trio pleaded guilty to incitement to subversion to overthrow the government. Did the evidence show the other two were also guilty? That’s all. . TWISTING THE TALE Of course, western journalists and diplomats did their usual thing. They didn’t attend the trial nor did they read the judgment. They just ignored the facts, and said: - It’s about vigils and acts of remembrance, innit? [clip] - It’s about freedom of expression and assembly, innit? [clip] - It’s about human rights, innit? [clip] - It’s about suppression, innit? [clip] (Sorry, that’s my attempt to do a London accent!) So Western journalists and diplomats are lying to the world – as usual. . ARE HONG KONG COURTS FAIR? Some reporters say anti-China campaigners cannot win in the Hong Kong courts—to which I reply that that’s not true—a Hong Kong court ruled in favor of one of these same defendants in a 2022 trial. And to US reporters who say Hong Kong has turned lawless—I’ll just point out that Hong Kong scores HIGHER on global legal rankings than the United States does. . THAT ALL-IMPORTANT CONTEXT Meanwhile, what do you get for trying to overthrow the UK government? The maximum sentence is life imprisonment. What about trying to overthrow the US government? 20 years, or life imprisonment or the death penalty for treason if a foreign enemy is involved. Trying to overthrow the Indian government is considered: an offense against the state, and the punishment is imprisonment for life, or they just put you to death. I could go on, but you get the point. The west is always trying to demonize the east. Let’s not be fooled. Stay open-minded. Peace.

Nury Vittachi

17,975 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

"In the Dele Farotimi's case, it does appear that there is a strategy to try him in a jurisdiction where the chances of him getting justice is not very high... We're not just dealing with an elder from Ekiti State, we're dealing with a man who more or less is richer than Ekiti State." Inibehe Effiong raises concerns about the fairness of the trial of Dele Farotimi given the influence of Afe Babalola in Ekiti State.

"In the Dele Farotimi's case, it does appear that there is a strategy to try him in a jurisdiction where the chances of him getting justice is not very high... We're not just dealing with an elder from Ekiti State, we're dealing with a man who more or less is richer than Ekiti State." Inibehe Effiong raises concerns about the fairness of the trial of Dele Farotimi given the influence of Afe Babalola in Ekiti State.

News Central TV

54,506 просмотров • 1 год назад

Culture is not a list of values, literary works, or costumes. Culture is a story that a people tell themselves about themselves in their territory across generations. It is their inheritance, whether they like it or not. If the people disappear, so does the culture. You cannot swap those people out for others and keep their culture, just as you cannot replace the photographs of children on their mother's mantelpiece and claim that the family remains the same.

Culture is not a list of values, literary works, or costumes. Culture is a story that a people tell themselves about themselves in their territory across generations. It is their inheritance, whether they like it or not. If the people disappear, so does the culture. You cannot swap those people out for others and keep their culture, just as you cannot replace the photographs of children on their mother's mantelpiece and claim that the family remains the same.

Connor Tomlinson

35,461 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

THE GENOCIDE IN NIGERIA IS CHRISTIAN SPONSORED GENOCIDE Another Christian who understands the truth even the kind of truth many people are uncomfortable hearing or try to silence. This is not about religion, tribe, or political alignment; it is about honesty, courage, and standing for what is right. When someone chooses to speak the truth despite pressure, criticism, or backlash, it shows integrity and a deep sense of responsibility to society. Truth has no religion it belongs to everyone who seeks justice and fairness. It takes courage to speak facts that go against popular opinion or personal interests. Many people avoid the truth because it exposes wrongdoing or challenges their beliefs. Voices like this should be encouraged, not attacked or ignored. A better society can only be built when people are willing to accept and act on the truth. Unity comes from honesty, not from hiding reality or pretending everything is fine. Silence in the face of truth only allows problems to grow bigger. In the end, the truth will always stand no matter how long it is resisted.

THE GENOCIDE IN NIGERIA IS CHRISTIAN SPONSORED GENOCIDE Another Christian who understands the truth even the kind of truth many people are uncomfortable hearing or try to silence. This is not about religion, tribe, or political alignment; it is about honesty, courage, and standing for what is right. When someone chooses to speak the truth despite pressure, criticism, or backlash, it shows integrity and a deep sense of responsibility to society. Truth has no religion it belongs to everyone who seeks justice and fairness. It takes courage to speak facts that go against popular opinion or personal interests. Many people avoid the truth because it exposes wrongdoing or challenges their beliefs. Voices like this should be encouraged, not attacked or ignored. A better society can only be built when people are willing to accept and act on the truth. Unity comes from honesty, not from hiding reality or pretending everything is fine. Silence in the face of truth only allows problems to grow bigger. In the end, the truth will always stand no matter how long it is resisted.

BabaSadiq😎

11,672 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

Today, MPs will decide whether to refer the Prime Minister to the Committee of Privileges. The vote is not about deciding the PM's guilt or innocence - it is about determining whether there is a case for the PM to answer. On the evidence before us, there plainly is. This case should go to the Committee of Privileges.

Today, MPs will decide whether to refer the Prime Minister to the Committee of Privileges. The vote is not about deciding the PM's guilt or innocence - it is about determining whether there is a case for the PM to answer. On the evidence before us, there plainly is. This case should go to the Committee of Privileges.

David Davis MP

17,587 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад