Dame Caroline Dinenage, a prominent Conservative Party politician and chairwoman of the UK House of Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee, has recently attracted attention for her involvement in global censorship efforts. She has been identified as a key figure in the new censorship regime endorsed by Klaus Schwab, the leader of the Fourth Reich, and his associates at Davos.
It has come to light that Dame Caroline’s husband, Mark Lancaster, is Baron Lancaster of Kimbolton, a former deputy commander in the British Army’s psychological operations division. He was involved in the government’s crackdown on dissent during the Covid-19 pandemic. This connection has raised suspicions about Dame Caroline’s role in the UK government’s ongoing persecution of those who question official narratives surrounding Covid-19 and Ukraine.
In a concerning display of authoritarianism reminiscent of dystopian novels such as “1984” and “Brave New World,” Dame Caroline wrote to social media platforms Rumble and TikTok, urging them to financially harm popular comedian Russell Brand. She baselessly accused him of serious wrongdoing and questioned whether these platforms should allow him to earn money from his content. This attempt to punish someone based solely on media allegations is deeply troubling.
Furthermore, Dame Caroline served as the UK Digital and Culture Minister from February 2020 to September 2021, during which time she spearheaded the Online Safety Bill. This repressive legislation, endorsed by the World Economic Forum, has been criticized for its potential infringement on free expression and privacy rights. It is worth noting that Dame Caroline’s efforts in pushing this bill earned her a prestigious title from Princess Anne, showing the close relationship between the British royals and the WEF.
Dame Caroline’s letter to Rumble’s CEO, Chris Pavlovski, exemplifies the problematic nature of her actions. She requested information regarding Brand’s ability to monetize his content and questioned whether Rumble would follow YouTube’s lead in suspending his earning capabilities. She also implicated the platform in potentially undermining the welfare of victims of inappropriate behavior. However, it is not the role of governments to prosecute individuals based on mere allegations. This authoritarian approach goes against the principles of the Westminster System and common law.
Russell Brand has rightly accused the government of attempting to bypass the judicial system by demonetizing his YouTube channel without proper investigation. Brand asserts that all his past sexual encounters were consensual. In a livestream on Rumble, he criticized mainstream media for supporting a state agenda and silencing independent voices. His allegations hold weight, especially considering his transition from a more establishment-friendly leftist stance to a more outspoken opposition against the globalist agenda.
It is also important to question the timing of the allegations made against Brand. Why did his alleged victims wait more than a decade to come forward, and why did they choose to air their complaints through the media instead of reporting them to the police? These questions raise doubts about the legitimacy of the accusations and suggest a possible media-driven agenda.
Rumble’s CEO, Pavlovski, strongly condemned Dame Caroline’s actions, describing her letter as inappropriate and dangerous. He emphasized the importance of investigating serious crimes like sexual assault while recognizing the need for due process. Pavlovski argued that the allegations against Brand have no connection to his content on Rumble, making it inappropriate for the UK Parliament to dictate who should be allowed to speak on the platform.
The attempts by Dame Caroline Dinenage and others to silence dissenting voices and control online platforms are deeply concerning. They undermine the principles of free expression and due process essential to a democratic society. It is crucial to remain vigilant and protect our rights and freedoms in the face of increasing censorship efforts.
Source link
