The Great Reset Aims To End Freedom Of The Press, Speech, And Expression

Governments, corporations, and elites have always been fearful of the power of a free press, because it is capable of exposing their lies, destroying their carefully crafted images, and undermining their authority.

the great reset aims to end freedom of the press, speech, and expression

In recent years, alternative journalism has been growing and more people are relying on social media platforms as sources of news and information.

In response, the corporate state, digital conglomerates, and the mainstream media have been increasingly supportive of the silencing and censoring of alternative media outlets and voices that challenge the official narrative on most issues.

At the recent World Economic Forum meeting in Davos, Switzerland, “Australian eSafety commissioner” Julie Inman Grant stated that “freedom of speech is not the same thing as a free for all,” and that “we are going to need a recalibration of a whole range of human rights that are playing out online—from freedom of speech … to be free from online violence.”

Meanwhile, the Canadian government is seeking to restrict independent media and the freedom of expression via the implementation of Bill C-11, which would allow it to regulate all online audiovisual platforms on the internet, including content on Spotify, Tik Tok, YouTube, and podcast clients.

Similarly, the UK is seeking to introduce an Online Safety Bill, the US “paused” the establishment of a Disinformation Governance Board following backlash, and the European Union approved its own Digital Services Act, all of which aim to limit the freedom of speech. Attempts by elites and politicians to silence dissenters and critical thinkers is not something new.

In fact, history is full of examples of “the persecution of men of science, the burning of scientific books, and the systematic eradication of the intelligentsia of the subjected people.”1

However, these current efforts to curtail freedom of speech and press by supposedly liberal governments are still somewhat ironic, given that even “the most intolerant of churches, the Roman Catholic Church, even at the canonization of a saint, admits, and listens patiently to, a ‘devil’s advocate.’

The holiest of men, it appears, cannot be admitted to posthumous honors, until all that the devil could say against him is known and weighed.”2

The corporate state, digital conglomerates, and the mainstream media want to ensure that they have the exclusive authority to dictate people’s opinions, wants, and choices through their sophisticated propaganda techniques. To do so, they have even resorted to transforming falsehoods into truth.

In fact, the word truth has already had its original meaning altered, as those who speak the truth on certain subjects are now regularly accused of spreading hate speech, misinformation, and disinformation.

Presently, truth is no “longer something to be found, with the individual conscience as the sole arbiter of whether in any particular instance the evidence (or the standing of those proclaiming it) warrants a belief; it becomes something to be laid down by authority, something which has to be believed in the interest of the unity of the organized effort, and which may have to be altered as the exigencies of this organised effort require it.”3

However, modifying the definition of truth comes with the potential for great peril, as truth-seeking often contributes to human progress in that it leads to discoveries that ultimately benefit society at large. It should be noted that truth is by no means the only word whose meaning has been changed recently in order for it to serve as an instrument of propaganda; others include freedom, justice, law, right, equality, diversity, woman, pandemic, jjab, etc..

This is highly concerning, because such attempts at the “perversion of language, the change of meaning of the words by which the ideals” of the ruling class are expressed is a consistent feature of totalitarian regimes.4

As a number of liberal-democratic governments increasingly move toward totalitarianism, they want people to forget that there is “the greatest difference between presuming an opinion to be true, because, with every opportunity for contesting it, it has not been refuted, and assuming its truth for the purpose of not permitting its refutation.”5

According to them, “public criticism or even expressions of doubt must be suppressed because they tend to weaken public support.”6

In fact, they believe that all views and opinions that might cast doubt or create hesitation need to be restricted in all disciplines and on all platforms. This is because “the disinterested search for truth cannot be allowed” when “the vindication of the official views becomes the sole object” of the ruling class.7

In other words, the control of information is practiced and the uniformity of views is enforced in all fields under totalitarian rule.

The suppression of freedom of the press, speech, expression, and thought means that current and future generations will be “deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error.”8

They are also at risk of becoming ignorant of the fact that the only way in which a person can know “the whole of a subject” is by “hearing what can be said about it by persons of every variety of opinion, and studying all modes in which it can be looked at by every character of mind.”9

That is to say, current and future generations will be unaware that “the steady habit of correcting and completing” one’s own “opinion by collating it with those of others, so far from causing doubt and hesitation in carrying it into practice, is the only stable foundation for a just reliance on it.”10

At present, it is likely that the masses do not regard freedom of the press, speech, expression, and thought as being particularly important, because “the great majority are rarely capable of thinking independently, that on most questions they accept views which they find ready-made, and that they will be equally content if born or coaxed into one set of beliefs or another.”11

Nevertheless, no one should have the power and authority to “select those to whom” freedom of thought, enlightenment and expression is to be “reserved.”12

In fact, John Stuart Mill went so far as to claim that “if all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.”13

He further added that silencing the expression of an opinion is essentially an act of “robbing the human race,” which applies to both current and future generations.14

Even though the suppressors can deny the truth to people at a particular point in time, “history shows that every age having held many opinions which subsequent ages have deemed not only false but absurd; and it is as certain that many opinions, now general, will be rejected by future ages, as it is that many, once general, are rejected by the present.”15

If current efforts to suppress freedom of the press, speech, expression, and thought succeed, then the search for truth will eventually be abandoned and totalitarian authorities will decide what “doctrines ought to be taught and published.”16 There will be no limits to who can be silenced, as the control of opinions will be extended to all people in all fields.

Accordingly, contemporary authoritarian policy makers need to be reminded about the crucial importance of freedom of speech, expression, and thought, which the US Supreme Court recognized in the 1957 case Sweezy v. New Hampshire when it ruled that:

“to impose any strait jacket upon the intellectual leaders in our colleges and universities would imperil the future of our Nation. No field of education is so thoroughly comprehended by man that new discoveries cannot yet be made…. Teachers and students must always remain free to inquire, to study and to evaluate, to gain new maturity and understanding; otherwise, our civilization will stagnate and die…. Our form of government is built on the premise that every citizen shall have the right to engage in political expression and association.

“This right was enshrined in the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights. Exercise of these basic freedoms in America has traditionally been through the media of political associations…. History has amply proved the virtue of political activity by minority, dissident groups, who innumerable times have been in the vanguard of democratic thought and whose programs were ultimately accepted. Mere unorthodoxy or dissent from the prevailing mores is not to be condemned. The absence of such voices would be a symptom of grave illness in our society.”

  • 1. F.A. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom (New York: Routledge 2006), p. 168.
  • 2. John Stuart Mill, On Liberty (Kitchener: Batoche Books, 2001), p. 22.
  • 3. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom, p. 167.
  • 4. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom, p. 161.
  • 5. Mill, On Liberty, p. 21.
  • 6. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom, p. 164.
  • 7. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom, p. 165.
  • 8.  Mill, On Liberty, p. 19.
  • 9. Mill, On Liberty, p. 22.
  • 10. Mill, On Liberty, p. 22.
  • 11. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom, p. 168.
  • 12. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom, p. 168.
  • 13. Mill, On Liberty, p. 18.
  • 14. Mill, On Liberty, p. 19.
  • 15. Mill, On Liberty, p. 20.
  • 16. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom, p. 165.

The US Is Dying, Can We Save Her?

“Liberty must at all hazards be supported.  We have a right to it, derived from our maker.  
But if we had not, our fathers have earned and bought it for us,  at the expense of their ease, 
their estates, their pleasure and their blood.”     – John Adams

“Timid men…prefer the calm of despotism to the boisterous sea of liberty. ”     – Thomas Jefferson

“The people…are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty. ”    – Thomas Jefferson

” A constitution of government once changed from freedom, can never be restored.
Liberty once lost is lost forever. ”   – John Adams

“Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people, who have a right … and a desire to know; but besides this, they have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible,  divine right to that most dreaded and envied king of knowledge, I mean of the characters and  conduct of their rulers. ”   – John Adams


The above quotes are from two of our early presidents.  They ran against each other in 1800… In what is sometimes referred to as the “Revolution of 1800,” Vice President Thomas Jefferson of the Democratic-Republican Party defeated one-term incumbent President John Adams of the Federalist Party.  Jefferson served two terms.

I recently read Glynn Adams wonderful article, True Biblical Christianity .  It made me weep because he was so right. I had just one caveat.  It started long before Saul Alinsky; he was just another cog in the 175-year-old wheel promoting the replacement of a free capitalist society with a Marxist one.  In 1848, European communists immigrated to America after failing to implant socialism in Europe.  By 1860 they were flourishing.  There were 13 high ranking officers in the Union Army who were avowed Marxist/Engels communists.  The war was not over slavery, it was over economics to be exact, and 700,000 American citizens died because of that vile and unconstitutional war.  The abhorrent evil of slavery was already on its way out as well it should have been. But that unconstitutional war was the watershed event that changed America forever.  

Karl Marx wrote to Lincoln many times urging Lincoln to use the slavery issue as it would give America a centralized federal government in order to secure a birthplace for communism to easily be spread.  Apparently, Lincoln wrote back to him. Yet, diaries of both northern and southern soldiers kept asking, “Why is slavery being brought into this?”  

That watershed event has led to what our country has become today, and the totalitarian tyranny that has taken hold of our once great nation, the “land of the free and home of the brave.”

America’s Public Education

In 1880, John Dewey’s progressive education was blooming.  Later, John Rockefeller Jr. was enamored with Dewey (no relation to the Dewey of the decimal system) and sent all four of his sons to the progressive school Dewey had birthed.  Every one of them was not only dyslexic but they were functionally illiterate (lack of phonics).  One of those sons was a heartbeat away from the presidency when he was VP under Gerald Ford.  Nelson Rockefeller couldn’t read, and when he gave a speech, he’d come out and lay a bunch of papers on the dais and then proceed to tell the audience that he had prepared a speech, but was going to speak from his heart.  He hired Soviet Agent Henry Kissinger to read to him.

That was the death knell of American academic teaching and the destruction of our youth, which in 1932 was well on its way to a coalition of Marxist thinking and collectivism.  Then came teachers’ unions…you know the rest of the story, by the 50s McCarthy knew we were infiltrated, so the communists destroyed him.  (For a look at the communist planners of the early 1930s, purchase the book, The Turning of the Tides , originally published in 1953. And for the truth of Senator Joe McCarthy, read M. Stanton Evans’ Blacklisted by History .)

Morality

Morality is gone, the filth paraded down the streets of America used to hide in the back alleys, and is now on full display, even to our kindergarten children.  The perversion and fetid noxiousness of this sewage emanates directly from the very pit of hell.  It has been growing for many decades in America and started long ago…does not our Lord call it an abomination in both the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament!?  And these perversions are on display in American politics for all the world to see.  Nearly every corporation has exploded with praise for “Pride Month!”  Pride in perversion and disgusting and filthy activities now claimed by our culture to be normal.  Even L.L. Bean has promoted Pride Day with the stolen rainbow promise of our Lord on their goods.

The Rule of Law

Although the preamble to the Constitution begins with “We the people,” the word “democracy” (mob rule) is not mentioned in the Articles of Confederation, Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, or the Bill of Rights. Even the Pledge of Allegiance is “to the Republic for which it stands.” We are supposed to be a nation of laws, “rule of law” rather than “mob rule.”  One of the inherent weaknesses in a government based  only  on the will of the people is the potential for  mob rule . This was often the downfall of direct democracies, where all the people decided on public matters directly rather than through representatives. We were created as a  representative Republic not a democracy .

Law, that precious thing of justice is now also gone.  Daily we see examples of charges being thrust against the innocents forcing them to lose their savings and livelihoods to defend themselves.  There are so many examples, one cannot possibly list them all, but there are obvious truths blaring to the nation that those with eyes to see and ears to hear know only too well.  

Trump was innocent of charges, but the Stalinist leftists continue to harass him with charges that are unconscionable and serve only to cover over their sins while their comrades in the media continue the harangue of outright lies and prevarications. And Trump wasn’t the only one…General Michael T. Flynn suffered for three and a half years under this tyranny.  Roger Stone is still suffering because of the fraudulent charges against him and the loss of his savings and livelihood.  Both were fortunately pardoned by President Trump.  Today it’s Peter Navarro being harassed and led away from the airport in handcuffs and chains.  An unnecessary show of tyrannical force for the public.

Hunter Biden is free, the illegitimate president in our White House is not being impeached for his failure to protect America. Forty Billion taxpayer dollars has been sent to the fascist nation of Ukraine and you certainly understand just whose pockets the kickbacks will end up in.  Inflation is skyrocketing, food plants are burned to the ground, the southern border is flooded with elements of danger for American citizens.  It is an invasion the president is supposed to protect us from, but ignores his constitutional oath and duties in order to bring to us the “Great Reset.”

Durham continues his pseudo attempts at being an investigator who will bring justice and we all know that will never happen.  Hillary’s campaign lawyer, Michael Sussman was acquitted of lying to the FBI because the trial was held in the democratic conclave of DC.  That same conclave will find all Republicans guilty, i.e., Roger Stone.

The illegal and murderous actions of the last two years have served to destroy America’s people and rip the guts from our unalienable Bill of Rights.  Few complained, they mostly complied. The American public acquiesced their freedoms and the societal impact of group think, or mass formation psychosis was parroted from the demonic entities hired by Task Force head, Benedict Arnold Pence.  

Muzzling the Pulpits 

The muzzling of the clergy was done through the Lyndon Baines Johnson Amendment of 1954.  Johnson had faced political difficulties and attacks from organizations in his home state of Texas.  So LBJ proposed the amendment to the tax code that has greatly restricted the free speech of pastors and churches on July 2, 1954. 100 Cong. Rec. 9604 (daily ed. July 2, 1954). The words “in opposition to” were added in 1986.  Ass’n of the Bar of the City of N.Y. v. Comm’r , 858 F.2d 876,879 (2d Cir. 1988). 

“The IRS rule that strips tax exemption from churches engaged in electioneering was born of Lyndon Johnson’s Texas politics, not the U.S. Constitution,” Larry Witham, Texas politics blamed for ’54 IRS rule LBJ wanted to keep Senate seat, WASH. TIMES, Aug. 27, 1998 (discussing a study done by James Davidson, a Purdue University sociologist).

Unbelievably, it passed and it was not clear why Congress even enacted it .  There was little to no debate over the amendment or how it would even influence churches, so I suspect backroom finagling went on just as it has for over 175 years and as it is today.

For the first century and a half our nation had a tradition of our clergy being involved in the political activities of the day.  It was commonplace for preachers and rabbis to speak of candidates and issues.  But that was stopped by LBJ, who had also cheated to gain the Senate seat which he had actually lost to former Governor Coke Stevenson.  Link Check out History of the 501(c)3 .

The IRS Gov website states, “Section 501(c)(3) organizations are restricted in how much political and legislative ( lobbying ) activities they may conduct. For a detailed discussion, see  Political and Lobbying Activities . For more information about lobbying activities by charities, see the article  Lobbying Issues PDF ; for more information about political activities of charities, see the FY-2002 CPE topic  Election Year Issues PDF .”

So, if a church or organization has received tax exempt status as well as the ability to deduct your charity giving from your income tax, then you best keep your mouth shut about any political activities.  Otherwise, you’ll be harassed into closure if you disobey these draconian and censorial laws.

Political Sermons of the American Founding Era

How different the sermons and papers were from 1730 to 1805, the founding era of our country.  Ellis Sandoz’ edition of the 1600-page book of political sermons from that era is still available here .  They are starkly different than any you’d hear today from any of our clergy.

In 1800, Tunis Wortman wrote to his Christian readers and his entire address can be read in full here .  In this letter, he is defending Thomas Jefferson against the charge of deism.

Here is just one paragraph of that momentous tome:

I address you upon the most solemn and momentous subjects which can interest the mind-religion and liberty. I consider you in the capacity of believers and patriots, as equally anxious to maintain every inestimable right which appertains to Christians and to men. You have a religion which deserves your pious solicitude; but need I to remind you that you likewise have a country! Are you to be told that your duty, as Christians, is irreconcilable with the sacred obligations which bind you to the state? Are you at this day to be solemnly and seriously called upon to sacrifice your freedom upon the altars of your God? No, my countrymen, your religion is inestimable and worthy of your care. Your civil constitution is also invaluable. It is the palladium of all your social blessings, and the peculiar gift of providence. Your obligations to your children, to your country, and to heaven, command you to defend that constitution. With a voice too powerful to be resisted, they conjure you to cling to, and fasten upon it, “with the last strong hold which grapples into life.”

Conclusion

We have lost so much in these 235 years of America.  Our country was founded by great statesmen, men of letters and men of faith, men who desired freedom and liberty at all costs.  We have failed to defend what they gave us.  It is way past time for all good men to stand for freedom, liberty, justice, morality, academic education and true God given Judeo and Christian faiths.   

July 4 th is upon us…Independence Day, where our founders threw off the chains of taxation and control from Great Britain and fought for our own independence from tyranny.  It is time to take to the battle once again.  The cost is even higher this time, but if we wait much longer, our fate will be decided and the losses will be greater than those we’re seeing today.

Please take a stand against this Luciferian evil which has permeated our beloved nation.  Too many have died to save her, let them not have died in vain.

Canada Moves To Make Asset Freezing Under Emergencies Act Permanent & Their Justice Minister Says Trump Supporters Should Worry About Having Their Bank Accounts Frozen

Canada has moved to make the asset freezing part of its Emergencies Act, which was used to target supporters of the Freedom Convoy protests, a permanent fixture.

canada moves to make asset freezing under emergencies act permanent & their justice minister says trump supporters should worry about having their bank accounts frozen

Wow, who saw that one coming?

In order to stop what the Trudeau regime referred to as “illegal blockades,” the government threatened to freeze the bank accounts of demonstrators and anyone who donated money to them.

Under the Emergencies Act, bank are required to freeze accounts without a court order, while all crowdfunding platforms and payment providers are mandated to provide information to FINTRAC (Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada).

Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland announced that many of the measures imposed ‘temporarily’ to deal with the protesters (after they had been suitably demonized as violent extremists) will now become permanent.

“We used all the tools that we had prior to the invocation of the Emergencies Act and we determined we needed some additional tools,” Freeland announced

“Some of those tools we will be putting forward measures to put those tools permanently in place. The authorities of FINTRAC, I believe, do need to be expanded to cover crowdsourcing platforms and payment platforms,” she added.

Ronald Reagan has been proven right again.

“Nothing lasts longer than a temporary government program.”

Meanwhile, as we previously highlighted, such measures are likely to exclude protected classes (basically anyone who isn’t a native Canadian or white), with groups such as immigrants and refugees enjoying an exemption.

Canada’s Justice Minister Says Trump Supporters Should Worry About Having Their Bank Accounts Frozen

canadian justice minister says trump supporters should worry about having their bank accounts frozen

ADRIAN WYLD via Getty Images

Canada’s Justice Minister David Lametti says Trump supporters who donated money to the Canadian Freedom Convoy should “be worried” about having their bank accounts frozen.

Lametti made the obscene comment during an interview with CTV after he compared someone financially supporting the truckers to funding a terrorist movement.

“You just compared people who may have donated to this to the same people who maybe are funding a terrorist,” the reporter stated. “I just want to be clear here, sir. A lot of folks say, ‘Look, I just don’t like your jjab mandates and I donated to this, now it’s illegal, should I be worried that the bank can freeze my account?’ What’s your answer to that?”

“Well, I think if you are a member of a pro-Trump movement who’s donating hundreds of thousands of dollars and millions of dollars to this kind of thing, they oughta be worried,” responded Lametti.

Earlier this week, the Trudeau regime warned that anyone who supported or donated to the Freedom Convoy protest could have their bank account frozen under an emergency powers law.

“This is about following the money. This is about stopping the financing of these illegal blockades,” Trudeau’s Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland said during a press conference on Monday. “We are today serving notice if your truck is being used in these illegal blockades your corporate accounts will be frozen.”

Lametti also threatened the truckers, who are protesting against jjab mandates, with the loss of their licenses if they continued to participate in the demonstration.

The Canadian government’s demonization of the trucker protest as an extremist movement incited the GiveSendGo hack, which revealed the names of 90,000 people who donated to the Freedom Convoy.

This was then ruthlessly exploited by media outlets like the CBC and the Washington Post, which have spent the last few days identifying and harassing people on the leaked list who donated.

It sure looks like Donald Trump was right when he stated that “the fake news media, [is] the true enemy of the people”:

As we highlighted earlier, even far-left Congresswoman Ilhan Omar spoke out against the practice, calling it “unconscionable.”