Next Level Surveillance

"We need not just to monitor people, we need to monitor what’s happening under their skin" - Yuval Noah Harari

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt will discuss with Trump officials whether the United States should grant asylum to British nationals punished for free speech, she said in a Monday press briefing.Leavitt announced the plans in response to a question by Winston Marshall, the former lead guitarist of the Grammy-award-winning rock band Mumford &amp; Sons.&nbsp;"As we speak, there are people in prison for quite literally reposting memes,” said Marshall, a British national. “We have extensive prison sentences for tweets, social media posts and general free speech issues. Would the Trump administration consider asylum for British citizens in such a situation?"Leavitt chuckled at the question, saying it was a “very good question” and promising to discuss it with national security officials."I have not heard that proposed to the president, nor have I spoken to him about that idea, but I certainly can talk to our national security team and see if it's something the administration would entertain,” she said.In March, the US State Department expressed concern about the UK’s denial of free speech to British citizens. The Trump administration, which is being courted by the Labour government for a trade deal, indicated that the UK’s crackdown on freedom of speech may be a deciding factor in any agreement.&nbsp;“U.S.-UK relations share a mutual respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms,” the State Department’s Democracy, Human Rights, &amp; Labor Bureau said in a statement. “However, as Vice President Vance has said, we are concerned about freedom of expression in the United Kingdom.”<h2 id="">Free speech in the UK</h2>The UK has passed various laws that make it a crime to offend certain people or groups. British taxpayers have been arrested and jailed for posting social media content critical of gender ideology, Islam, migrants, and women. Others have been arrested for thinking prayerful thoughts near abortion facilities. The Communications Act of 2003 criminalizes any electronic “message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene, or menacing character.” The Online Safety Act of 2023, set to take effect this year, makes it an offense to post “harmful content” or false information that could cause “non-trivial psychological harm” to users.UK officials have been open about targeting non-citizens for free speech. Last year, Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley said: “We will throw the full force of the law at people. And whether you’re in this country committing crimes on the streets or committing crimes from further afield online, we will come after you.” When a reporter asked Rowley whether billionaire Elon Musk would be guilty of a crime for posting “offensive” social media content from the US, Rowley responded: “You can be guilty of offenses of incitement, of stirring up racial hatred, there are numerous terrorist offenses regarding the publishing of material.” Prime Minister Keir Starmer also threatened social media users when he said: “I guarantee you will regret taking part in this disorder whether directly or those whipping up this action online.”British police <a href="https://www.thegoldreport.com/news/orwellian-uk-police-spend-60-000-hours-a-year-on-non-criminal-hate" id="">spend</a> an estimated 60,000 hours a year investigating reports of non-crime hate incidents (NCHIs), according to a study last year. While not criminal offenses, NCHIs are incidents where someone belonging to a protected class feels that they were treated with hostility. An NCHI may be reported to police if a person claims that someone else treated them with ill will, spite, contempt, prejudice, unfriendliness, antagonism, resentment, or dislike based on their race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or transgender identity.<h2 id="">‘Dedicated police officers who are scouring social media’</h2>Last year, British authorities <a href="https://www.thegoldreport.com/news/uk-government-threatens-citizens-who-share-riot-footage" id="">threatened</a> taxpayers with prison for sharing footage of the anti-immigration riots that broke out after a Muslim immigrant knifed to death three little girls under 10."The offense of incitement to racial hatred involves publishing or distributing material which is insulting or abusive, which is intended to or likely to start racial hatred," Director of Public Prosecutions Stephen Parkinson said. "So if you retweet that, then you're republishing that and then potentially you're committing that offense. And we do have dedicated police officers who are scouring social media. Their job is to look for this material and then follow up with identification arrests and so forth. So it's really, really serious.""People might think they're not doing anything, harmful. They are, and the consequences will be visited upon them," he warned.<h2 id="">Criticizing gender ideology</h2>In 2023, the Metropolitan Police summoned James Goddard to an interrogation over his social media post mocking rainbow flags.“These comments are targeting specifically the LGBTQ community would be considered ‘grossly offensive’ thus being in contravention 127 of the Malicious Communication Act 2003,” said police in the summons.In a similar <a href="https://www.frontline.news/post/great-britain-has-fallen-british-war-veteran-arrested-for-social-media-post" id="">incident</a>, three police officers arrested a war veteran at his home over a social media post that showed a swastika made of rainbow flags, a commentary on the state-sponsored intimidation of citizens to embrace gender ideology.In 2023, British police <a href="https://www.thegoldreport.com/news/uk-authorities-summon-citizen-for-grossly-offensive-social-media-post" id="">arrested</a> a 16-year-old Leeds girl with autism after the child said she thought one of the officers looked like a “lesbian” because she looked similar to the child's openly lesbian caretaker.Leicestershire Police urged citizens to report others for misnaming people who claim to have changed their gender by referring to them by their “previous” name.&nbsp;&nbsp;Caroline Farrow, a journalist and mother of five, was the subject of a five-month-long police investigation in 2019 for opinions she expressed on social media regarding transgenderism. According to Farrow, her chief crime was “misgendering” — referring to someone by their actual gender and not the gender they claim to be.In 2022, Farrow was <a href="https://www.gbnews.com/news/media-commentator-caroline-farrow-arrested-by-police-over-gender-twitter-spat/373269" id="">arrested</a> in her home for “malicious communications and harassment” while she was making dinner for her children. Photos provided by Farrow show police forcing their way into her house. When she asked to see a warrant, they replied, “We don’t need one.” Police seized several electronic devices, including from her husband’s parish next door. They then brought Farrow outside where a female officer subjected her to a body search and took her to the station.Last year, The Gold Report detailed how London’s Metropolitan Police investigated Maya Forstater for criticizing a transgender doctor who boasted that his patients were unaware of his true gender. Forstater, who heads the women’s rights group Sex Matters, had <a href="https://a-question-of-consent.net/2020/09/16/doctors/" id="">voiced</a> concerns about whether the patients of Dr. Kamilla Kamaruddin were giving their informed consent. In a tweet, Forstater said Dr. Kamaruddin “enjoys intimately examining female patients without their consent.” Police summoned the 51-year-old Forstater to Charing Cross Police Station, where they threatened her with arrest for “malicious communications.” They interrogated her about whether she meant “to target a member of the transgender community” and if she understood that her “tweet could be perceived as transphobic.” Police also wanted to know if Forstater had any “remorse” for her tweet.<h2 id="">Silent prayer</h2>British police have <a href="https://www.thegoldreport.com/news/uk-police-continue-investigating-forbidden-thoughts" id="">arrested</a> and issued fines to citizens who were silently praying in their heads while standing near abortion centers. Public Space Protection Orders (PSPOs) prohibit “protesting, namely engaging in any act of approval or disapproval or attempted act of approval or disapproval, with respect to issues related to abortion services, by any means. This includes but is not limited to graphic, verbal or written means, prayer or counselling.”’<h2 id="">An off-color costume</h2>Last year, police arrested British citizen David Wootton for posting photos of himself on social media showing him dressed as terrorist Salman Abedi for Halloween. In 2017, Abedi detonated a suicide bomb at an Ariana Grande concert at Manchester Arena, killing 22 people and wounding over a thousand more.<h2 id="">Insulting a BBC journalist</h2>British protestors who demonstrated against lockdowns in 2021 were <a href="https://www.frontline.news/post/uk-sentences-lockdown-protestors-for-insulting-journalist-in-further-crackdown-on-speech" id="">sentenced</a> to community service for insulting a BBC journalist.&nbsp;<h2 id="">Holocaust references</h2>A 63-year-old Jewish father is facing prison time for <a href="https://www.thegoldreport.com/news/uk-jewish-father-faces-prison-for-holocaust-reference">offending</a> a “progressive rabbi” with a Holocaust reference. Rupert Nathan committed the "offense" when he posted criticism of Gabriel Kanter-Webber in a comment on a friend’s Facebook post. He referred to Kanter-Webber, who heads the Brighton and Hove Progressive Synagogue, as a “creep,” a “fake Rabbi,” and a “kapo boy.” Kapos were Jews in concentration camps who were deputized by the Nazis with authority over other Jewish prisoners.In response to the “kapo” remark, Kanter-Webber reported Nathan to the police, who came to Nathan’s home and arrested him in front of his 12-year-old daughter. He was charged with the crime of malicious communications and detained for 12 hours. His case has been referred to the Crown Prosecution Service for criminal proceedings and he faces up to two years in prison.‍

Trump administration mulls granting asylum to Brits

The UK is cracking down harshly on 'offensive' communications

Republican North Dakota Governor Kelly Armstrong vetoed a bill that aimed to protect children from being exposed to sexually explicit books in schools.Current North Dakota law prohibits public libraries from placing sexually explicit materials in children’s sections and requires them to establish policies to that effect. Senate Bill 2307 would have expanded that law to apply to school districts, requiring them to keep sexually explicit materials out of school libraries.In a <a href="https://northdakotamonitor.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/SB-2307-veto-message-signed.pdf" id="">letter</a> last week explaining his decision to veto the bill, Governor Armstrong called it “censorship” and an attempt to “legislate morality.”“While I recognize the concerns that led to its introduction, SB 2307 represents a misguided attempt to legislate morality through overreach and censorship,” he wrote. “The bill imposes vague and punitive burdens on professionals and opens the door to a host of unintended and damaging consequences for our communities.”The bill would have allowed parents or other “interested parties” to use local prosecutors to challenge school boards if sexually explicit books were placed in school libraries, a provision that Armstrong felt would have wasted taxpayer resources and placed “local librarians, school districts, and state’s attorneys in an untenable situation.”“I don’t pretend to know what the next literary masterpiece is going to be,” Armstrong wrote. “But I know that I want it available in a library. And if a parent doesn’t think it is age appropriate for their child, then that is a parenting decision. It does not require a whole of government approach and $1.1 million of taxpayer money.”<h2 id="">Whose rights are being violated?</h2>The proposed legislation would have advanced efforts to keep LGBTQ propaganda targeting children, which often contains sexually explicit and pornographic material, out of schools. Armstrong’s criticism of the proposal as “censorship” echoes similar claims by gender ideologues on the Left, who insist that any attempt to protect children from gender propaganda is “book banning” and violates free speech.But parents are arguing that subjecting their children to such materials violates their Fourteenth Amendment right to direct their children’s education and religious upbringing. In Mahmoud v. Taylor, a watershed case currently before the US Supreme Court, a coalition of Muslim and Catholic parents are suing the Montgomery County Board of Education for refusing to allow them to opt their children out of LGBTQ propaganda, which includes sexually explicit themes. In “Pride Puppy,” for example, three- and four-year-old children learn about Pride parades and are encouraged to search for images of “underwear,” “leather,” “lip ring,” “[drag] king,” “[drag] queen,” and a sex worker.Even though the parents are not requesting that the materials be removed from the school library—just that they be mad optional—they are still being <a href="https://www.advocate.com/news/mahmoud-v-taylor-lgbtq-books#rebelltitem2" id="">accused</a> of “censorship.”&nbsp;‍

Republican governor vetoes bill that would have shielded kids from sexually explicit books

Whose constitutional rights are being violated?

The Department of Justice has stripped the United Nations Relief Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees (UNRWA) of its immunity from prosecution over its involvement in terrorism.<h2 id="">UNRWA knowingly employed Islamic terrorists</h2>In December, the New York Times <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/08/world/middleeast/hamas-unrwa-schools.html" id="">reported</a> that at least 24 senior UNRWA staff were recently discovered to be members of Hamas or Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) while acting as educators in UNRWA schools in Gaza. Approximately 10% of UNRWA’s 13,000 Gazan employees are <a href="https://www.thegoldreport.com/news/get-us-out-of-the-un-birchers-not-surprised-un-personnel-participated-in-rape-massacre-in-israel" id="">known</a> to have ties to Hamas or Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Nearly half of all UNRWA personnel have relatives in the terror groups. Former UNRWA union chief Suhail al-Hindi occupies a senior leadership role in Hamas. In August, the UN acknowledged the participation of at least nine UNRWA personnel in the October 7th massacre in Israel. They were eventually dismissed. In 2004, then-UNRWA Commissioner-General Peter Hansen said: “Oh, I am sure that there are Hamas members on the UNRWA payroll, and I don’t see that as a crime.”In June, 101 victims of the October 7th attack filed a billion-dollar lawsuit against UNRWA. According to the complaint, UNRWA gave Hamas access to its sites for weapons storage and command centers and helped funnel US dollars to Hamas via its employees. UNRWA responded by claiming diplomatic immunity to prosecution, a claim that the Biden administration <a href="https://www.thegoldreport.com/news/federal-government-demands-immunity-for-un-terrorists" id="">supported</a>.<h2 id="">UNRWA is not entitled to diplomatic immunity</h2>In a stark reversal, however, the Trump administration is denying the UN agency’s immunity claim. The US Attorney in the Southern District of New York sent a 10-page <a href="https://static-cdn.toi-media.com/www/uploads/2025/04/gov.uscourts.nysd_.623682.59.0.pdf" id="">letter</a> to District Judge Analisa Torres, explaining why UNRWA is not entitled to immunity in Estate of Tamar Kedem Siman Tov et al. v. UNRWA.“The atrocities committed by Hamas in the October 7 Attack were not only acts of terror, genocide, and crimes against humanity, they were torts in violation of the law of nations,” the letter said. “Because, as detailed below, the Defendants’ actions aiding and abetting those torts in violation of the law of nations, including but not limited to their funding of Hamas, occurred in significant part in the State of New York and in this federal judicial district, this Court has subject matter jurisdiction and venue over Plaintiffs’ claims against these Defendants. Many of the Plaintiffs separately have claims against Defendants for aiding and abetting Hamas’ violations of the Torture Victim Protection Act of 1991 (“TVPA”), which requires no such New York nexus.”The letter made several points as to why UNRWA is not entitled to diplomatic immunity, chief among them being that the president is empowered by Congress to grant immunity at his discretion, and the president has not done so for UNRWA. While the UN General Convention, which was ratified by Congress in 1970, claims immunity for itself, the DOJ argued in the letter that it applies only to the UN’s six main bodies but not to specialized agencies like UNRWA.“The complaint in this case alleges atrocious conduct on the part of UNRWA and its officers,” the letter concluded. “Of course, such allegations are only the first step on a long road, where plaintiffs will be required to prove what they have alleged. But UNRWA is not above that process—nor are the bulk of the remaining defendants. The Government believes they must answer these allegations in American courts. The prior Administration’s view that they do not was wrong.”In September, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) killed Fatah Sharif Abu al-Amin, a UNRWA employee who was serving as the head of Hamas in Lebanon. Two weeks earlier, the IDF had attacked a Hamas command center housed in a school in central Gaza. Among those killed were three Hamas operatives who were employed by UNRWA.UNRWA’s involvement also extended to the abductions. Israeli hostages who were rescued from Gaza reported being held by a UNRWA employee. Another UNRWA employee was filmed carrying the dead body of an Israeli before bringing it to Gaza on October 7th.‍

Protecting your
Medical Freedom
and Civil Liberties

Stream What is a Doctor? Today!

The Jordan B. Peterson Podcast - A Good Doctor Speaks with Dr. Gold

Latest Work

Next Level Surveillance

Trump administration mulls granting asylum to Brits

Republican governor vetoes bill that would have shielded kids from sexually explicit books

Trump DOJ strips UN terror agency of immunity

Latest Videos

How Much IsYour Freedom Worth?