by Adam Garrie, The Duran:
The US is no longer a safe space for free speech. Free speech in the USA has been reduced to the freedom to agree with pre-approved narratives and agendas.
Since the year 2000 the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission of the US Congress has produced reports on the nature of China-US relations, including on matters related to trade and security.
This year, the Commission has named Chinese news agency and broadcaster Xinhua as an “intelligence gathering organisation” in spite of producing no evidence to suggest that Xinhua is anything other than a news media outlet.
According to the report,
“Xinhua serves some of the functions of an intelligence agency by gathering information and producing classified reports for the Chineseleadership on both domestic and international events”.
This could likely be the first step in laying down a modern-day witch trial against Xinhua in the same way that wild accusations against RT have led the US forcing RT America to register as a “foreign agent”.
The United States is turning into a country where freedom of speech is now a privilege reserved only for classes of people who agree with the line of the deep state governmental consensus. It goes even beyond racism, as many US born citizens who have no ethnic connections to the peoples of Russia, work for RT America and will have to be included on the list of “foreign agents” even though they are US citizens with diverse ethno-racial backgrounds.
Things are becoming truly frightening in the United States where the First Amendment is becoming little more than a way leverage the use of state power against the individual’s right to say and even hear that which he or she wants to say and here.
A bill in the US Congress looks to criminalise support of the Boycott Divestment Sanctions (BDS) movement, a group which campaigns for a material and cultural boycott of Israel.
Taking things to an even more sinister level, the Texas city of Dickinson has stated that public relief funds will only be issued to citizens who agree “not to boycott Israel”. Not only is this sadistic, but because it does not draw the distinction between an active or passive boycott, it is unclear how such a requirement would be enforced.
If someone in Dickinson whose property was damaged in a hurricane has never bought an Israeli product in his or her life because the product was itself unattractive or too expensive, will this be proscribed? If someone in Dickinson went to the BDS website out of curiosity and just happened never to have bought Israeli products, is this person now guilty?
Read More @ TheDuran.com