Once the right to criminalize unpopular/controversial ideas has been established the logical next step is to tighten the definition of what constitutes ‘acceptable’.

Broadly, in discussions throughout societies, this is done by narrowly framing debates. What is it about Zionism that causes globalists to make a special effort to quash discussion through criminalization?

Can these generally unknown events help us to piece together what might be going on?

The Lavon Affair – from another source – eventually you will get to ‘on the way to blow up a cinema in Alexandria’ and you get a better sense of the nature of this event.

Despite recent attempts to shut down and/or ‘re-structure’ Qatar based Al-Jazeera it gave us this on the USS Liberty episode.

Zionism might, at some point, figure in an in-depth debate regarding these incidents. Mr. Macron might allow that, so long as you don’t take a position e.g. anti-Zionist. He’s telling you what the ‘acceptable’ boundaries of debate are. We know the globalists are prepared to back up their definitions of acceptable with imprisionment.

Is he right? What do YOU think? Better say now before it becomes illegal to express YOUR thoughts …

[21 Jul 2017]

The right not to do something can be as important as the right to do it