Right wing cancel culture at it again.

[Batmanisaplaceinturkey]

This really is a scary time for free speech.

Another example right wing hypocrisy when it comes to free speech:

Jimmy Kimmel Live! suspended indefinitely after host’s Charlie Kirk comments https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2025/sep/18/jimmy-kimmel-live-suspended-indefinitely-after-hosts-charlie-kirk-comments?CMP=share_btn_url

I’m not sure but I remember on here at the time it was pretty much a no go suggestion. Odd

@EasternStandard agreed, one of the craziest aspects of the whole Covid shenanigans was the declaration that it was caused by a Chinese person eating a bat was absolutely fine but the (perfectly obvious from the start) suggestion that it was a lab leak was apparently appallingly racist. I’ll never understand that one.

Would the Batley teacher be viewed as cancel culture?

I believe he is out of hiding now but his life and that of his family has been devastated by one event that others found offensive. His mental health will never be the same.

But the Democrats took lying and deceit to a whole new level in the run up to the election, when they told the American public over and over again that Biden was fine. That he was capable of leading the country. Shamelessly the puppeteers were desperate to keep their puppet in power, at the huge danger that decision could have had potentially on having someone at the helm of one of the most powerful countries. On that lie alone, the Democrats demonstrated why they deserved defeat.

Censoring what you ‘believe’ to be right is exactly how we got here.
No it isn't. You find me an elected government, anywhere in the world, throughout history, that hasn't (whether through genuine belief, whether mistaken or otherwise) tried to censor speech that it reasonably considered to present an immediate and widespread danger to society. The logical endpoints is not immediately leaping to stifling comedians who make fun of the head of state. A democracy doesnt tolerate that.

But if this is really what you think, I hope you defended Alex Jones when he said Sandy Hook was a psy-op. Or is that somehow different?
I didn't defend what Alex Jones said, nor would I - I disagree with it.

If you're asking about his right to say it - Alex Jones has never been censored by any government, nor have I ever called for him to be. He was sued for defamation by people he legally (knowingly and repeatedly) defamed, by people he defamed (not the government). Yes, the existence of defamation laws is a restriction on free speech of sorts, but it has existed in the US since colonial times, and there is not a democracy in the world than does not have anti-defamation laws.

Kimmel, by comparison, has effectively been censored by the government, and has not defamed anyone (or come remotely close to it, legally).

So regardless of whose speech you agree with and whose you dont - Yes, it is different.

No. It’s because the Democrats leaned on social media sites to censor ordinary people like me. For saying nothing more than masking doesn’t work, natural immunity works, the vaccine is more harmful than beneficial in certain age groups, that lockdowns don’t work and cause more harm than good.

Republicans didn’t do that. Democrats did. And I haven’t forgotten.

(The Republican platform also currently aligns with more of what I want, so it’s not just this issue for me. But that was the spark that inflamed me, if I’m being totally honest)

Could have, would have, should have. Just lots of whataboutery. I’m happy that we’re getting cosy with America. Just look at the worrying picture we had of the Russian, Chinese and North Korean leaders walking side by side recently. We have to start accumulating allies and staying close to them because there is something brewing, and we need to be prepared for whatever transpires.

If you're asking about his right to say it - Alex Jones has never been censored by any government, nor have I ever called for him to be. He was sued for defamation by people he legally (knowingly and repeatedly) defamed, by people he defamed (not the government). Yes, the existence of defamation laws is a restriction on free speech of sorts, but it has existed in the US since colonial times, and there is not a democracy in the world than does not have anti-defamation laws

If you think Charlie Kirk’s estate wasn’t going to go after Kimmel for stating that he was murdered by one of his own (demonstrably false), then you really don’t know where we are at. ABC of course is going to want to avoid going down this costly road.

Exactly.

But I also think that free speech comes with responsibility.

I believe in free speech and my views are towards the right, but I don't agree with publicly celebrating anyone's murder regardless of who they are. Murder is illegal for a reason and people should not be able to condone illegal acts publicly.

It is literally impossible to defame the dead.

Edit: to add, for what it's worth, that even if he had survived, Kirk would have had no plausible case for defamation.

The idea there would be any kind of case for defamation based on this statement just indicates you have no idea what defamation actually is. I’m not even sure one of the elements required for defamation would be present here, never mind all of them. Just a daft suggestion.

"I believe in free speech but people should be stopped from saying things I don't like."

Glorious.

I’m assuming that you’re an American citizen. Can I ask where you found your evidence that informed your views on covid approaches?

Condoning illegal acts only. It isn't what I like or don't like, it is what the law says is right and wrong. Or do you think that we should have no laws at all?

Surely, it goes without saying.

With free speech comes responsibility in that you have to obey the law otherise you have anarchy.

Tbh, Biden, when I've seen him interviewed since the election, seems a lot more fine than Trump.

You think Trump and his administration aren't leaning on SM sites? Ha. I think it won't be long before he starts closing them down if they don't march to his tune.

Are you aware that:

a - The guy that ran the lab that leaked the virus that indeed created the virus also was in charge of the USA approach which in turn led alot of the world's approaches
b - the guy also benefitted from the vaccine because they were developing it prior to the virus being released?
c - the man in charge of the USA 'pardoned' this same guy, prior to any charges being made against him, after the havoc and destruction his organisations and his behaviour wrecked on the planet?

Also, the 'vaccine' wasn't even a 'vaccine'. You can still catch it so it isn't any sort of vaccine at all.

I knew about the limitations of masking due to studying them for the purpose of protection from air pollution, years before COVID. That was an entry point for me personally.

No offence, but last week on X I was blocked from looking at a picture of MARY POPPINS DRINKING TEA. Due to age restrictions.

The headache of dealing with lawsuits might be enough. Though tbh I take the point that Kirk’s wife may not have a good case (so how did Sandy Hook parents win?)

Yes, I admit the optics are probably enough and a more straightforward reason.

Speaking of censorship I'd be right up for a ban on gobby Americans coming and infesting a UK website for parents. Every bloody thread that is vaguely political - haven't you got your own US websites to go to?

If Trump has told the truth about anything at any point, I'm sure it was inadvertent.

The Sandy Hook parents won because they were, personally, defamed. Jones made false statements about them (that they personally were dishonest - crisis actors complicit in a hoax), causing them reputational harm (and resulting damage).

The Estate's claim is beyond "not a good one", it'd probably be sanctioned for being frivolous if they tried to bring it. If you had to argue that Kimmell defamed someone (and he obviously didn't) the person with the strongest case would be the murderer...

I am not living in America. Should be fairly obvious from the current time.

But if you don’t want to talk about an American political event, what are you even doing on this thread?

Besides, Mumsnet hosted those of us who believed in the reality of biological sex when Reddit et al wouldn’t. Is that so wrong?

I bet.