US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere

1) Catalan Referendum Website Seizures (2017)

Spanish courts ordered ISPs to block dozens of pro-independence domains and mirror sites during the referendum. Civil Guard units physically entered data centers to seize servers tied to the Catalan government’s digital voting infrastructure.

2) GitHub Repository Takedown (2017)

Spain obtained a court order forcing GitHub to remove a repository that mirrored referendum voting code and site information, extending censorship beyond Spanish-hosted domains.

3) Rapper Convictions for Online Lyrics

Spanish rapper Valtònyc was convicted for tweets and lyrics deemed to glorify terrorism and insult the monarchy; he fled the country and fought extradition in Belgium for years.

⸻

France

4) Blocking of Protest Pages During Yellow Vests (2018–2019)

Authorities requested removals of Facebook pages and livestreams tied to the Yellow Vest protests, citing incitement and public order concerns.

5) Court-Ordered Removal of Election Content (2019 EU Elections)

French judges used expedited procedures under election-period misinformation law to order removal of allegedly false political claims within 48 hours.

6) Prosecution of Political Satire as Hate Speech

Several activists were fined or prosecuted for online posts targeting religious or ethnic groups in explicitly political contexts, even where framed as satire.

⸻

Germany

7) Mass Police Raids Over Social Media Posts

German police have conducted coordinated nationwide dawn raids targeting individuals accused of posting illegal political speech under hate-speech laws.

8) Removal of Opposition Content Under NetzDG

Platforms removed thousands of posts from nationalist or anti-immigration political actors within 24 hours to avoid heavy fines under NetzDG enforcement pressure.

9) Criminal Convictions for Holocaust Commentary Online

Individuals have received criminal penalties for online statements denying or relativizing Nazi crimes, even when framed in broader political debate contexts.

⸻

United Kingdom

10) Police Visits Over Controversial Tweets

British police have conducted “non-crime hate incident” visits to individuals’ homes over political tweets, creating official records despite no prosecution.

11) Arrests for Offensive Political Posts

Individuals have been arrested under public communications laws for posts criticizing immigration or religion in strongly worded terms.

12) Removal of Campaign Content Under Electoral Rules

Election regulators required digital platforms to remove or restrict political ads that failed to meet transparency requirements during active campaigns.

⸻

Italy

13) Enforcement of “Par Condicio” Silence Online

During mandated pre-election silence periods, online political content—including posts by candidates—has been ordered removed or fined.

14) Criminal Defamation Charges Against Bloggers

Italian bloggers critical of politicians have faced criminal defamation prosecutions for investigative posts during election cycles.

⸻

Finland

15) Conviction of Sitting MP for Facebook Posts

Finnish MP Päivi Räsänen was prosecuted for Bible-based comments posted online regarding sexuality and religion; although ultimately acquitted, the criminal process itself was lengthy and high-profile.

⸻

Sweden

16) Convictions for Anti-Immigration Facebook Posts

Swedish courts have convicted individuals for Facebook comments criticizing immigration policy when deemed “agitation against a population group.”

⸻

Netherlands

17) Criminal Case Against Opposition Politician

Dutch politician Geert Wilders was convicted (without penalty) for campaign-rally remarks later amplified online, deemed discriminatory.

⸻

Austria

18) Rapid Court Orders Against Political Posts

Austria’s updated online hate-speech regime enabled expedited court orders compelling removal of allegedly unlawful political speech within days.

⸻

Belgium

19) Prosecution of Political Party Messaging

Members of the Vlaams Belang party have faced legal sanctions for campaign messaging shared online deemed racist or discriminatory.

⸻

Switzerland

20) Criminal Fines for Referendum Campaign Speech

Swiss activists have faced criminal fines for online referendum messaging judged to violate anti-discrimination law during highly contentious votes.

Until it will. Please do not make me laugh. This will probably be used to help organize converting regimes or look for potential spies. Not denying possible positive value. If they're so generous they should expose Youtube this way and some generic communication platform if they believe they can pull it off (reliable ban bypassing)

The site will just be blocklisted by countries who don’t want you to use it. Duh.

You’d have to have some horrendous security instincts to use a government-hosted VPN.

Remember January 2025 when we were pitched the idea that the Trump administration was going to make the federal government efficient and cut frivolous programs?

Let me know when the budget deficit starts to decrease!

For example, UK police track what they consider to be undesirable "non-crime" speech, build databases of people, and intimidate them for these non crimes (knock on their doors, invite them to come to police station, advise them not to say such things, etc). This is quite a new thing, within the past ~10 years.

There have also been other high profile cases of people being arrested for posting things that were not like that burn the hotel down case. They arrested 12,000 people in 2023 and convicted 1,100 of those. For cases where the evidence is as cut and dried as posts made online, they could only secure convictions in 8% of cases, which seems staggering to me when UK's conviction rate generally is like 80%.

Even the conviction rate, even if you say yes there are laws to prohibit certain speech, how far is too far? Are these kinds of laws and convictions needed? Why don't all other countries need them? Why didn't UK need them 20 years ago when there was still internet and social media? Is it not concerning to you that we're told this kind of action is required to hold society together? I'm not saying that calls to violence don't happen or should be tolerated, but if it is not a lie that arresting thousands of people for twitter posts and things is necessary to keep society from breaking down then it seems like putting a bandaid on top of a volcano. It's certainly not developing a resilient, anti-fragile society, quite the opposite IMO.

Is nobody allowed to be concerned about any of this without being some horrible underground extremist, in your opinion?