Two British anti-hate speech campaigners sanctioned by US state department – UK politics live | Politics
important events
Why does the US State Department say it is sanctioning Clare Melford?
And what is this? Sarah RogersThe US Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy at the Department of State said: in social media title Last night I explained why Clare Melford was sanctioned.
WE SANCTIONED: Clare Melford. He leads the Global Disinformation Index (GDI), a UK-based organization that monitors websites for “hate speech” and “disinformation.” If you question blood libels about residential schools in Canada, you are engaging in “hate speech,” according to Melford and GDI. This NGO used @StateDept taxpayer money to promote the censorship and blacklisting of American speech and press. They have also joined the damaging EU Disinformation Code of Practice.
Rogers’ tweet also included an image of the following quote: a GDI report Published September 2025 on hate speech and bigotry in Canada.
Here is the full passage.
The section on anti-Indigenous hate speech demonstrates how deep-seated colonial tropes are reshaped to serve contemporary hate speech goals. These narratives frame Indigenous peoples as corrupt, undeserving of treaty rights, or actively harming Canada’s well-being, especially in contexts related to land use, environmental resistance, or constitutional recognition. Digital denialism around residential schools and abuses against indigenous communities reveal coordinated efforts to delegitimize truth and reconciliation, undermining national commitments to right historical injustice. These findings are vital to Canada’s ongoing reconciliation efforts, including understanding how settler state narratives have been weaponized by hostile actors in post-colonial democracies.
Analysis of misogynist and anti-2SLGBTQIA+ narratives reveals that gender-based hate speech is a critical entry point into broader extremist movements online. Women with a public profile, especially women of color, are disproportionately targeted by harassment, hate speech, and threats of violence. Meanwhile, disinformation targeting queer and transgender people portrays them as morally corrupt or ideologically dangerous, often accusing them of “grooming” or disrupting social stability. These narratives are central to the rhetorical arsenal of far-right movements and require urgent attention in online safety, education, and digital governance efforts.
The anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant narratives identified in this report are based on a consistent Islamophobic framework that portrays Muslims as culturally maladjusted, socially reactionary, or strategically infiltrating Western institutions. These narratives often emerge in response to refugee policies, equality programs, or the public visibility of Muslim figures in Canadian life. Framed as defenders of Western values, its supporters instrumentalize gendered language and demographic fear to advance exclusionary policies. These chapters highlight how Islamophobia operates not only as an individual prejudice but also as a tool of political mobilization and disinformation strategy.
There’s more information on what boarding school rejection means. This article For conversation.
Why does the US state department say it is imposing sanctions on Imran Ahmed?
What’s this Sarah RogersThe US Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy at the Department of State said: in social media title Last night we explained why Imran Ahmed was sanctioned.
WE SANCTIONED: Imran Ahmed, a key collaborator in the Biden Administration’s efforts to weaponize the government against US citizens. Ahmed’s group, Center to Counter Digital Hate (CCDH), was created the famous “disinformation dozen” reportcalled for platforms to deplatform twelve American “anti-vaxxers,” including current HHS Secretary @SecKennedy. Leaked documents from CCDH show that the organization listed “shutdown Musk’s Twitter” and “trigger regulatory action in the EU and UK” as priorities. The organization supports the UK’s Online Safety Act and the EU’s Digital Services Act to expand censorship in Europe and globally.
Obviously, other organizations supporting the UK’s Online Safety Act include the UK government!
Here’s more information about X trying to shut down CCDH.
Two British anti-hate speech campaigners sanctioned by US State Department
Good morning. Christmas is a time of peace on earth and goodwill towards all people. But there is little sign of that in US/UK relations this morning; The Trump administration sanctioned two Britons, among others, for allegedly trying to stifle free speech in the US, leading to Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey getting into a Twitter spat with a senior figure in the US state department.
Let’s start with sanctions. Yesterday Marco RubioUS Secretary of State announced this expression says:
The State Department is taking decisive action against five individuals who led organized efforts to force American platforms to censor, demonize and suppress American viewpoints they oppose. These radical activists and weaponized NGOs have sophisticated censorship crackdowns by foreign governments, invariably targeting American speakers and American companies. Therefore, I have determined that their entry, presence, or activities in the United States would result in potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States.
The State Department imposed sanctions on five Europeans.
Two Britons appear on the list: Imran Ahmed, chief executive of the Center to Counter Digital Hate, and Clare Melford, who runs the Global Disinformation Index. Ahmed worked for the Labor Party and was close to Keir Starmer’s chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney. Accordingly Politico’s London PlaybookAhmed lives in Washington, where he has an American wife and child, and is currently facing deportation. Politico also says Melford is facing revocation of his US visa.
Last night Sarah RogersUndersecretary of State for Public Diplomacy at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs made the following statement: a topic on x defends the decision. He said the Trump administration was targeting the “censorship-NGO ecosystem.”
Today the US issued SANCTIONS that reinforce the “red line” I raised on @GBNEWS. So: extraterritorial censorship of Americans.
Today’s sanctions target the censorship-NGO ecosystem.
These sanctions are visa-related. We’re not resorting to drastic Magnitsky-style fiscal measures, but our message is clear: If you spend your career encouraging censorship of American speech, you are not welcome on American soil.
It also dealt a harsh blow to the Liberal Democrats.
None of those sanctioned is a current UK or EU official; but we know that foreign government officials are actively targeting the United States. This week, Liberal Democrats in the UK claimed that President Trump’s National Security Strategy amounted to “foreign intervention” by a “hostile foreign state” because it correctly identified mass immigration and the decline of national sovereignty as Europe’s existential security concerns.
In fact, Davey didn’t say: national security strategy Because he criticizes mass immigration, it amounts to foreign intervention in British politics. He said that because the document clearly said that U.S. European policy should prioritize, among other things, “developing resistance to the current course of Europe within European nations.”
In direct response to Rogers on X last night, Davey he made this point himself.
Donald Trump has made it his explicit policy to ‘build resistance’ in the UK and elsewhere.
So yes, I think this counts as foreign interference.
I will be on the blog until 14.00. If there’s time, I might even write something festive.
