Starmer Unleashes Surveillance State

Censoring truth to 'keep you safe'

Jun 16, 2026

UK to block legal but harmful information during crisis events
Enhanced moderation like ‘enhanced interrogation’ is extra-legal
A state above the law is open to charges of state terror

(1,900 words or nine minutes of your company)

16 June 2026

UK’s Labour Party has launched a multi-pronged attack on free speech. The timing coincides with outrages: from the public’s perspective, stabbings and attempted beheadings; from the bureaucratic perspective, the resulting, sometimes violent, protests.

As to the motive, we have only clues. Top bureaucrats and royals are exempt from the latest surveillance rules — on the pretext of protecting their security and thus disabling their devices being tracked or searched, unlike yours.

It is no coincidence that similar measures are being rolled out in the UK, Australia and Canada.

This is an attack on the Anglosphere, treating them like Crown colonies — but many people don’t see it nor ask what’s the purpose.

The U.S. is not spared, from a massive roll out of surveillance data centres under the pretext of artificial intelligence, to the Flock cameras that track vehicles and now even faces.

Western media has for years accused China of running a “social credit system.” Increasingly that’s the pot calling the kettle black; every accusation being an admission.

Arms of the intelligence service have been ordered to provide appropriate messaging — scripting the “calls for peace” by the families of victims in horrific events, to shaping the narrative in the media. The soldiers and spinners of the Research, Information and Communications Unit (RICU) ensure that messaging communicates the enrichment of multiculturalism and demonises dissent.

The Orwellian-sounding Office of Communications, OFCOM, can instruct social media or Internet providers to implement “enhanced moderation.” Like “enhanced interrogation” aka torture, this is a necessary measure to get around the law in times of crisis.

Enhanced moderation will block “legal but harmful” information during “crisis events.”

In plain English this means concealing the truth, or lying, when the government considers the truth to be inconvenient.

Social media platforms that host discourse critical of the government — notably Twitter/X and TikTok — must block users unless they identify themselves.

Protecting children?

This is imposed in the name of protecting children, banning anyone under 16 from specific platforms. This is proven to be hypocrisy and deceit: the ban applies to Snapchat and Instagram, YouTube, Facebook, Reddit, Twitch, Kick and Threads.

It does not apply to BlueSky which has no constraints on adults posing as children and tolerates discussions of paedophilia, nor Discord which has been used to groom for sexual and terror purposes.

Thanks for reading! This post is public so feel free to share it.

The bigger issue is that once governments begin restricting speech there’s always more to ban, while banning the discussion of a problem does not eliminate the problem.

It is instructive to look at history, and to consider that the violence and protests are some kind of a bluff — that the present crisis, real or exaggerated, is the pretext to implement measures that will restrict protest during a coming, bigger crisis.

The bluff works like this:

Street crime by recent migrants allows a double clampdown, on incitement to protest and on “hate speech” towards “protected groups.” (Why only specified groups are protected under hate speech laws is a question to be raised elsewhere.)
Forcing identification in the name of safety also identifies dissenters.
Wars create migrants by destroying economies and displacing people. Wars also disrupt our home economy, creating shortages and price rises for food, energy and minerals essential to production.
All are justified by appeals to humanitarian intervention: wars, accepting migrants, rationing food and energy, and culling your rights.
The coming protests against shortages will be suppressed through censorship and clampdowns imposed in advance in the name of street crime.
Energy-based rationing (technocracy) cannot work without programmable currency which in turn requires digital identity, imposed to protect children.

Programmable currency and bio-digital identification will avoid confrontations like the Novocherkassk massacre of 1962 when troops opened fire on meat factory workers, whose protest had exposed a crucial vulnerability in the system.

In future, dissenters will simply have their lives closed down, from banking to travel, in the way the Canadian bankers crushed the trucker protests against vaccine mandates.

See Crisis Update - U.S. Initiates State Control Of Food Supply - Coincides with 60th anniversary of Soviet massacre over meat shortages (May 20, 2022)

What we have learned from the government’s reaction to protests over the stabbing of Henry Nowak in Southampton just before Christmas last, and the attempted beheading and blinding of Stephen Ogilvie in Belfast this month, is that the state’s foremost concern is to preserve the reputation of institutions.

It does not matter if those institutions are not fit for purpose, and do not deliver the state’s obligations to the citizenry: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, defence against external threats, public order within, and functional infrastructure in return for taxation.

Overarching project

In the new normal of nudge theory, or shaping public behaviour through incentives and skewed information (such as we saw during the Covid response), you will be told what you need, and to refuse the offer will be regarded as dissent from the greater good, to be suppressed first by silencing your voice and, later, by who knows what.

The phrase, “never let a good crisis go to waste” is telling you that any crisis will do, so long as it advances the goals of the owner-investors.

While agitators (contracted or freelance) and their amplifiers (journalists and influencers) focus your attention on specific events or happenings, know that those who pay them have an overarching project which is not even hidden: they call it Agenda 21, and its way station, Agenda 2030.

To put it another way, if the bureaucracy is so desperate to control thought and behaviour, it must have a reason. What’s the purpose?

“Treason doth never prosper: what’s the reason?
For if it prosper, none dare call it treason.”
— Sir John Harington (1560-1612)

Perfidious Albion

The UK is leading the way, which is a clue.

Minitrue, Orwell’s Ministry of Truth, was based on his experience at the BBC.

Ofcom is staffed disproportionately by alumni of the BBC. It would control messaging during a crisis, yet the minister responsible, Northern Ireland secretary Hilary Benn could not, when asked, define a crisis — bureaucrats were still working on a definition, he said.

Then, you have the coincidence.

Australia introduced digital age verification requirements for children aged under 16 on December 10, 2025

The Canadian government introduced proposed legislation, Bill C-34, the Safe Social Media Act, on June 10, 2026

The UK introduced digital age verification requirements for children under 16 in mid-2025 under the Online Safety Act. This will extend to some social media platforms next year.

Draconian censorship

It follows two restrictions on free expression: the hate speech bills introduced across the Anglosphere, and the equation of criticism of Israel with delegitimising Jewish people’s right to self determination. These measures have been criticised for being vague and open to interpretation. The real concern is they set a precedent for more draconian censorship.

The concern expressed here on Moneycircus is that such measures are used to shield the powerful who should be held to account, on an equal basis, without preferential “protected classes” of speech.

A second bluff works like this:

Terrorists attack Israel or any “protected class” of people
An MI6 officer sets up RICU as part of the Prevent counter-terrorism strategy, modelled on the post war Information Research Department (IRD).
Never mind that MI6 helped sponsor terrorists like al Qaeda-ISIS in Afghanistan and Syria.
Information control is extended to any criticism of Israel, or any ad hoc definition of a protected class
RICU then expands the definition of “non-crime hate incidents” and advises police to increase investigations
Any comment on race, religion, sexual orientation or disability becomes a springboard for banning yet more speech

As we stated above, once governments begin restricting speech there’s always more to ban. At the very least the censors must justify their jobs. At worst they are ideologues and social engineers set on reshaping society.

RICU was forced to reverse its advice to police to find more “non-crime hate” criminals, after criticism led the UK government to scrap it, without referring to the shadowy RICU.

It has since been revealed that RICU crafted the appeal for peace issued in the name of Mark Nowak, father of Henry. The police also tried to interfere with the prosecution of his killer Vickrum Digwa in order to blame Henry for starting the confrontation.

Soldier poster boys

The Daily Mail reports that “A team in an unmarked van is also understood to have toured the area plastering the walls with posters bearing hashtags such as #TurnToLove, #ForLondon and #LoveWillWin.” [1]

The latter tag is similar to another social engineering slogan “Love is love” used by Minor-Attracted Persons.

Once again, it makes us question how far the social engineers want to go, and why such “change agents” are embedded in military intelligence which claims its role is defence of the realm (strictly, they swear no oath but merely sign the Official Secrets Act, binding them to lifelong confidentiality).

What drives our concern is the bureaucrats and soldier-censors never stick to one story: is the threat Russians or Persians externally or the “radical right” at home — a cohort largely invented by bureaucrats to castigate anyone who criticises the failure of the state to deliver its side of the bargain: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, defence against external threats, public order within, and functional infrastructure in return for taxation.

The soldier-censor is described in the following article:

Chronicle of Dissent - Why Public Is Enemy #1 - Rant in an age of narrative (Jan 31, 2023)

Self-reliant migrants

Such restrictions on liberty are always introduced in the name of “keeping you safe.”

The answer is to reject this offer of safety. To emulate the self-reliance of our great-grandparents, many of whom were migrants, settling the New World.

They did so without any offer from the state, no benefits — they built their own homes and one by one they built a country.

The safest government is one you don’t need, and which cannot interfere with your liberty because you decline its offer.

As president Ronald Reagan said, there are no words more terrifying than: “I’m from the government and I’m here to help you.”

The bureaucrat or (non) government official with a saviour complex must be told: “Go, save your own soul.”

We don’t want your icky-fiddley, sticky-fingered, self-serving interference with our lives.

But for that stance to hold firm, we must stand on our own feet.

Moneycircus

Discussion about this post

Ready for more?