Tucker Carlson WAS RIGHT – PANDEMIC PLANS REVEALED
- Secret government unit suppressed free speech by working closely with social media firms.
- Sarah Connolly, leader of the unit, facilitated the swift removal of critical posts on platforms like Facebook and Twitter.
- Demands to shut down the unit and launch a parliamentary investigation are growing.
- BBC accused of stifling dissenting voices and creating a “climate of fear.”
- The revelations threaten free speech and undermine the pursuit of truth.
Video available on:
In a stunning revelation reported by the Telegraph, a secretive government unit, known as the Counter Disinformation Unit (CDU), has been exposed for its role in suppressing free speech during the pandemic. The leader of this clandestine operation, Sarah Connolly, has admitted that the unit was in constant communication with social media giants, such as Facebook and Twitter, with the purpose of swiftly removing posts critical of lockdown measures and pandemic policies.
The CDU’s collaboration with social media companies to curtail discussions surrounding controversial lockdown policies was previously disclosed by the Telegraph. However, this latest revelation sheds even more light on the extent of government influence over social media platforms. The implications of such control over the flow of information are deeply troubling and have prompted calls for the unit to be shut down and for a parliamentary committee to investigate its activities.
Former Conservative Cabinet minister, David Davis, passionately argues that the CDU’s interference in the democratic process is indicative of a paranoid wing of the government exerting undue influence. Davis believes that a parliamentary inquiry, endowed with significant power and access, is necessary to address this issue.
Meanwhile, concerns have also been raised about the BBC’s role in the dissemination of government-approved narratives during the pandemic. Journalists within the BBC describe a “climate of fear” that stifled any attempts to provide a platform for lockdown skeptics. Those who dared to question the lack of balance in the corporation’s reporting were branded as dissenters. This revelation raises serious doubts about the impartiality and integrity of the BBC’s coverage during the crisis.
The identity of the head of the CDU remained a mystery until now. It has been revealed that Sarah Connolly, a career civil servant with experience in anti-terror policies, led the unit throughout the pandemic and continues to do so. While it is unclear if other senior ministers were involved in the CDU, speculations about its potential links to the intelligence services persist. The government, however, has repeatedly refused to disclose certain details for reasons of “national security.”
During her testimony to MPs, Connolly confirmed that the CDU maintained contact with almost all major social media platforms on a daily, sometimes hourly, basis. When posts were flagged by the unit as concerning, they were prioritized for removal, regardless of the company responsible.
The suppression of alternative viewpoints and anti-government reporting extended beyond the CDU’s activities. The BBC, who attended government meetings where so-called misinformation was discussed, faced accusations of acting as “the broadcast arm of the Government” during the pandemic. Journalists within the organization recall being ridiculed for attempting to give voice to lockdown skeptics, creating a chilling effect on any dissenting opinions.
As we delve into the details of these revelations, it becomes evident that the implications go far beyond the realm of pandemic policy. The core principles of free speech, discussion, and debate that underpin enlightened societies are under attack. The scientific revolution, which emerged from a recognition of ignorance and a rejection of arbitrary ideological dogma, ushered in an era of progress. It allowed humanity to move away from superstition and mysticism, paving the way for advancements in science, technology, and human rights.
However, in the midst of a pandemic, when voices and alternative viewpoints are banned, we risk descending into an echo chamber of conformity. Knowledge is not an immutable dogma; it is pursued through open debate, free speech, and critical thinking. This is how we uncover truth and expose falsehoods, ultimately propelling society forward.
Yet, cancel culture and the assault on free speech undermine these foundational Enlightenment principles that have been instrumental in societal progress. The media plays a crucial role in disseminating information, but recent events have demonstrated its propensity for deception and corruption. The labeling of anyone who questions the mainstream narrative as a conspiracy theorist is a dangerous tactic that diminishes the value of alternative perspectives and hampers the pursuit of truth.
Unfortunately, this assault on free speech is not limited to the pandemic era. Alarming plans are underway within the World Health Organization (WHO) to enforce authoritarian measures similar to those witnessed during the pandemic. Proposed reforms to pandemic agreements grant the WHO Director-General sweeping powers over member states, including the ability to mandate lockdowns, suppress dissenting opinions, and implement vaccination passports. These measures severely infringe upon individual rights and democratic principles.
The introduction of “health passports” under the WHO’s proposed treaty raises further concerns about the extent of control and surveillance that such a system would impose on individuals. Critics argue that this treaty allows the WHO to assert total authority over emergency operations, potentially giving foreign powers significant control. The erosion of civil liberties, akin to the COVID lockdowns, being administered by a foreign entity is a deeply troubling prospect.
The revelations surrounding government censorship, media manipulation, and threats to free speech demand our attention. We must remember the lessons of history and the transformative power of open dialogue and free thought. The pursuit of truth requires us to challenge prevailing narratives, engage in robust debate, and protect the principles that have shaped our society for the better. The time to defend free speech is now, for it is the foundation upon which a flourishing society is built.
