The left is trying to use international ‘lawfare' to shut down Musk and X
The first was two cartoon panels with the question, 'How do you tell who's telling the Truth?' The next panel offered the answer: 'The ones trying to silence other people are the ones lying.'
Just prior to that, Musk had reposted a post that reads, 'President Trump's State Department has announced it is coming to the defense of Elon Musk's X after France labeled it an organized crime group and opened a criminal investigation. The State Department's DLR [the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor] stated, 'As part of a criminal investigation, an activist French prosecutor is requesting information on X's proprietary algorithm and has classified X as an 'organized crime group.' Democratic governments should allow all voices to be heard, not silence speech they dislike. The United States will defend the free speech of all Americans against acts of foreign censorship.''
And just prior to that, Musk reposted a post from the conservative activist Mark Kern: 'There is a full on attack on the Internet by the UK and EU, disguised as 'for the children.' The ID requirement is affecting even Discord users and X users. It is full on dystopian as they ramp up police to arrest people for speech.' Below that is a link to a Telegraph article with the headline 'Elite Police Squad to Monitor Anti-Migrant Posts on Social Media.'
Multiple people I have spoken with in the U.S., the U.K. and the EU believe that Musk and his X platform represent the greatest single threat to the far left and its goal of pushing its narratives unchallenged across the globe. One way the left now seems intent on stopping Musk and X is by mimicking the various 'lawfare' schemes rolled out against then-candidate Donald Trump prior to the 2024 election, which many Trump supporters saw as an unethical attempt to force him out of the race.
While that 'lawfare' tactic failed — thanks in large part to Trump taking it head-on, day after day, while exposing it for what it was — activists in Europe and elsewhere believe the strategy can be refined and hardened for use against Musk and X in an attempt to intimidate, censor or silence them. Lest we forget, back in 2023, the European Union opened a probe into X for alleged 'failure to counter illegal content and disinformation.'
Ah. The catch-all accusation frequently used by the intelligentsia on the left: 'disinformation.' Recall the draconian COVID-19 dictates from the left enacted to combat 'disinformation'?
Here is a January headline from ABC News: 'EU politicians warn against Elon Musk's incursions into European politics.' Of course, Musk might rightfully retort that his 'disinformation' and 'incursions' were not only protected free speech, but simply ways to point out severe double-standards and harmful policies that were having an adverse effect upon the majority of the citizens of those nations.
I wrote a piece for this site a year ago titled ' Could Elon Musk actually be arrested and X cancelled?' I highlighted calls for Musk to be arrested for stating his opinions while anticipating that the personal animus directed against him, X and the internet by certain individuals and groups in Europe advocating for censorship and cancellation could grow. It now seems that I was correct.
All of which raises an obvious question:Why do so many on the left want to prevent people around the world from gathering as much information as possible on their own, then coming to their own conclusions based on their own research? Do they fear people thinking for themselves? Do they fear their own constituents, customers and neighbors?
Open minds open doors. I have always believed it imperative to listen to those I may disagree with. What if I am wrong and they are correct? What if they show me a truth I refused to believe out of ignorance, intolerance or indoctrination? Aren't I the one getting a gift — one I could not receive if their voices were censored or canceled?
Alarmingly, many on the left in Europe — as well as in the U.S. — don't seem to share my belief that we need to listen to those we disagree with. Note this April headline from The New York Times: 'E.U. Prepares Major Penalties Against Elon Musk's X.' The opening paragraph of the article spells it out: 'European Union regulators are preparing major penalties against Elon Musk's social media platform, X, for breaking a landmark law to combat illicit content and disinformation, said four people with knowledge of the plans.'
Once again, the left rolls out 'illicit content and disinformation' against Musk, X and the internet. Of course, millions around the world who are against censorship and cancellation and strongly in favor of free speech might say this is a transparent attempt by some on the left to intimidate and censor a site and voices that expose their continual failures to billions of people around the world.
One person's 'disinformation' is another's 'irrefutable truth.' Don't hide behind censorship. Let the people think for themselves.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a few seconds ago
- Yahoo
Nebraska Republican congressman booed over Trump's 'big, beautiful bill'
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -Republican U.S. Representative Mike Flood endured a contentious town hall meeting in Nebraska on Monday, as opponents of President Donald Trump's sweeping tax- and spending-cut bill booed and heckled him for over an hour. Flood fielded questions about Republican funding cuts to the Medicaid healthcare program for lower-income Americans, food assistance and funding for Trump's controversial crackdown on undocumented immigrants from his Lincoln audience. He argued that it was important to deny public health coverage to immigrants living in the U.S. illegally and to able-bodied adults who refuse work and then drew cheers backing the release of government files on disgraced financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. With Congress on its summer break, Republicans including Flood are trying to promote Trump's landmark legislation, nicknamed the "big, beautiful bill," which extended the president's 2017 tax cuts and ramped up spending for border security and the military. It will also add $3.4 trillion to the $36.2 trillion federal debt and leave about 10 million people without health coverage. "There's a lot of information out there that's wrong. We protected Medicaid. We cut $2 trillion out of the future debt. We worked to get results. And this bill builds for growth," he said to a chorus of boos. At times, angry audience members chanted: "Vote him out!" "How much does it cost for fascism? How much do the taxpayers have to pay for a fascist country?" asked one woman, who was irate about Trump's immigration crackdown and the use of disaster relief money to pay for an immigration detention center in South Florida nicknamed "Alligator Alcatraz." Flood's district is heavily Republican and not among the roughly three-dozen House seats expected to be competitive in next year's midterm elections, when Republicans will be defending their narrow House of Representatives majority, currently 219-212 with four vacancies. At his town hall, Flood, 57, responded to critics by saying that voters backed Trump's policies in the 2024 election: "Americans voted for a border that is secure. And I support the president enforcing our immigration laws." He later told another questioner who criticized him for not speaking out against Trump: "When I see something that I don't agree with, I don't run to the TV station as my first stop. I try to stop it before it gets worse." After the meeting, Flood told reporters: "I like to think that I was able to answer their questions. They may not agree with my answer. But the questions are always good and that makes me a better member of Congress."
Yahoo
a few seconds ago
- Yahoo
How will the UK-France migrants return deal work as it comes into force?
The Government's 'one in, one out' deal to return migrants to France in a bid to tackle Channel crossings is set to begin. The treaty was laid in Parliament on Tuesday, and will take effect from Wednesday with detentions expected in the coming days. The UK-France deal, which will also bring approved asylum seekers under a safe route to Britain, was agreed last month on the last day of French President Emmanuel Macron's state visit to the UK. Here is a closer look at the plan and what the issue is. – What is the concern over the Channel crossings? Some 25,436 migrants have arrived in the UK after crossing the English Channel this year – a record for this point in the year since data began being collected in 2018. This is up 48% on this point last year (17,170) and 70% higher than at this stage in 2023 (14,994), according to PA news agency analysis of Home Office data. At least 10 people have died while attempting the journey this year, according to reports by French and UK authorities, but there is no official record of fatalities in the Channel. Ministers want to end the crossings because they 'threaten lives and undermine our border security'. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper has said smuggling gangs have been allowed to take hold along the UK's borders over the last six years, making millions out of the dangerous journeys. On Tuesday, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch claimed the failure to stop migrants crossing the Channel is putting community cohesion at risk. Data on the crossings of migrants in 'small boats' like inflatable dinghies has been collected since 2018. In the first year of data, just 299 people were recorded to have arrived in the UK this way. Since 2018, 94% of migrants who arrived by small boat crossing have claimed asylum in the UK, or 145,834 out of 154,354 people. – What has the Labour Government's approach been to the issue? Since Labour came to power last July, the party has vowed to 'smash the gangs'. Ministers are seeking to ramp up enforcement action against smugglers with new legislation to hand counter terror-style powers to police, and new criminal offences aiming to crack down on the illegal trade. The Government is also seeking to reset the UK's relationship with Europe over the crossings, and France has agreed to change its rules to allow police to intervene when boats are in shallow water, rather than requiring them to still be on land. Meanwhile ministers are hoping to deter new arrivals promised jobs when they come to the UK by cracking down on illegal working and deportations of ineligible asylum seekers. – What is the new deal and how will it work? Last month, the Prime Minister and French president agreed a plan to send back small boats migrants, with an asylum seeker being sent to the UK in exchange in equal numbers. Under the pilot scheme, adults arriving on a small boat can be detained and returned to France for the first time. The trial is set to run until June 11 2026, pending a longer-term agreement or cancellation by either the UK or France with one months' notice. Asylum seekers accepted to come to the UK under the deal would travel via a safe, legal route, 'subject to strict security checks'. Those in France could express an interest to apply for asylum to the UK through an online platform developed by the Home Office, and would then carry out the standard visa application process and checks. Priority will be given to people from countries where they are most likely to be granted asylum as genuine refugees, who are most likely to be exploited by smuggling gangs, and also asylum seekers who have connections to the UK. If accepted, they would be given three months in the UK to claim asylum, and would be subject to the same rules for all asylum seekers not allowed to work, study or have access to benefits. Their claim could still be rejected during their time in the UK, and they could then be removed from the country. It is not clear what the criteria will be for deciding which migrants who arrive in the UK by small boat will be sent back to France, other than being aged over 18. New arrivals will be screened at Manston processing centre, in Kent, which is current procedure, before individuals determined to be suitable for the pilot and for detention, will be picked and held in an immigration removal centre. Their removal is expected to be made on the grounds of inadmissibility, that they have arrived from the UK from a safe country where their case can be heard instead, because an agreement is in place with France. The treaty confirms the migrants would be returned back to France by plane. It also agrees for a joint committee to be set up to monitor the agreement and arrange logistics. Migrants will be able to appeal against the decision based on exceptional circumstances. The Home Office said it had learned from the 'lengthy legal challenges' over the previous government's Rwanda scheme and would 'robustly defend' any attempts to block removal through the courts. – How many people will be part of the pilot and much will it cost? No official number of migrants has been confirmed to take part in the pilot, but it is understood numbers will grow over the pilot period and depend on operational factors. The Home Secretary has said the Government does not want to put a number on the amount as she believes it could aid criminal gangs. It has been reported that about 50 a week could be sent to France. This would be a stark contrast to the more than 800 people every week who on average have arrived in the UK via small boat this year. There is no funding to France associated with this agreement, and operations around the returns and arrivals will be paid for from the existing Home Office budget. – What has the reaction been to the deal? Opposition politicians were scathing about the Prime Minister's deal with Mr Macron, with shadow home secretary Chris Philp claiming the small percentage of arrivals to be removed would 'make no difference whatsoever'. Reform UK leader Nigel Farage also branded it a 'humiliation'. Meanwhile refugee charities have also criticised the plan and have urged the Government to provide more safe, legal routes for asylum seekers instead. Reacting to the plan coming into force, Amnesty International UK's refugee rights director, Steve Valdez-Symonds, said: 'Once again, refugees are treated like parcels, not people, while the public is left to pay the price for, yet another cruel, costly failure dressed up as policy.'
Yahoo
a few seconds ago
- Yahoo
Nebraska congressman Flood gets an earful over Trump's tax cut law in raucous Lincoln town hall
LINCOLN, Neb. (AP) — Rep. Mike Flood has gotten an earful during a public meeting in Lincoln aimed at discussing his support for the massive tax breaks and spending cuts bill that passed Congress and was signed into law by President Donald Trump. Flood, a second-term Republican who represents the GOP-leaning district that includes the University of Nebraska, on Monday braved the ire of a college town audience dominated by hundreds of people intent on expressing their displeasure chiefly with cuts to Medicaid benefits and tax reductions tilted toward the wealthy. Flood described the law as less than perfect but stood firm on its Medicaid and tax provisions, fueling a 90-minute barrage of jeers and chants in a scenario House Republican leaders have specifically advised GOP members to avoid. 'More than anything I truly believe this bill protects Medicaid for the future,' Flood said, setting off a shower of boos from the audience of roughly 700 in the University of Nebraska's Kimball Recital Hall. 'We protected Medicaid.' How voters receive the law, passed with no Democratic support in the narrowly GOP-controlled House and Senate, could go a long way to determine whether Republicans keep power in next year's midterm elections. Flood was resolute on his position but engaged with the audience at times. During his repeated discussions of Medicaid, he asked if people in the audience thought able-bodied Americans should be required to work. When many shouted their opposition, Flood replied, 'I don't think a majority of Nebraskans agree with that.' Dozens formed a line to the microphone to engage Flood, most asking pointed questions about the law but many others questioning moves by the Trump administration on immigration enforcement, education spending and layoffs within the federal bureaucracy. During Flood's discussion of his support of the law's tax provisions, which he argued would benefit the middle class, the audience exploded in a deafening chant of 'Tax the rich." Republican lawmakers' town halls have been few and far between since the bill passed early last month, in part because their leaders have advised them against it. Trump and others say the law will give the economy a jolt, but Democrats feel they've connected with criticism of many of its provisions, especially its cuts to Medicaid and tax cuts tilted toward the wealthy. Thomas Beaumont, The Associated Press
