Starmer Must Have Forgotten This!

Keir Starmer has now accused Elon Musk of interfering in British politics and trying to whip up division over the police handling of the Henry Novak case.Now, I'll make clear at the outset, this video is not about the Henry Novak case or the particular issues that it gave rise to.This is a very much bigger issue, because when the Prime Minister says Elon Musk is, quote, interfering in British politics simply by commenting on what is happening in Britain, There is a very obvious question to answer.

Since when did British politics become immune from foreign comment?And they call it interference.More importantly, why does it only seem to be foreign interference when a foreign person says something that our establishment doesn't like?Because we've been here before.Allow me to take you back to 2016, when Barack Obama, the then President of the United States, flew to the United Kingdom during the Brexit referendum campaign.And he told British voters that if they voted to leave the European Union, that Britain would be at the back of the queue for a trade deal with the United States.

Do you remember that?That wasn't some random man with a phone or some platform or something, you know, like Elon Musk.That was the sitting president of the United States.Flew to Britain, standing in Britain, during a British referendum, commenting directly on how British people should vote and what the outcome of that might be.Because let's be completely honest, the people who are now suddenly jumping up and down about foreign interference weren't exactly outraged back then.

Because that intervention suited them.It supported the position that they wanted.

It supported the campaign that they agreed with.So apparently when a foreign president comments on British democracy in a way the establishment likes, that is statesmanship.But when Elon Musk comments on British policing in a way

establishment dislikes, suddenly it's dangerous interference and meddling in British politics.That is the contradiction.And that, I urge you to consider.And that is not the isolated incident, because free speech cannot depend on whether a prime minister approves of the speaker or not.Because personally, I think there's a lot of selective outrage going on here.So let's take the politics out of it for a moment.

Forget whether or not you like or dislike Elon Musk, and forget whether you use or you like or dislike X. This is much more important than one person, one platform, or any one single thing.

It is perfectly legitimate for people outside the United Kingdom to comment on events that go on inside the United Kingdom.Of course it is.They are going to comment.It does affect people worldwide because we interact.British politicians comment on what goes on in America all the time.British journalists comment on America all the time.

We have British journalists in the United States literally stationed there commenting on what goes on in the United States all the time.We have British activists commenting on what goes on in America.British celebrities commenting on what goes on in America.

Britain has no problem exporting its political opinion, when it chooses to.

And that even extends to politicians.Because remember, in 2024, Labour figures were criticised because they travelled to the United States to support Kamala Harris during her presidential election campaign.

When Donald Trump's campaign complained about the election interference, Keir Starmer defended his Labour people and said, in substance, they were doing it in their spare time, not in their official capacity.Well, fine, you know, that might be the answer and that could be the answer, but it can't be one rule for one and another for another.

But there's a lot more to talk about in this video, particularly with digital ID, because they are trying to slip things past you that I absolutelyhave to talk to you about.I'll be back to you with that in just a minute.Now, as you might expect, I literally get hundreds of emails from you guys asking for bits of guidance here or there when you cannot afford formal legal advice.Those are on top of those that come into the law firm.And that's where today's sponsor comes in, which is Nexus AI.

Nexus AI gives you access to all of the top models under one login.Instead of paying separately for Gemini and ChatGPT and Claude and several other AI tools which can quickly add up to around $200 a month, you can access all of them in one place with a single Nexus AI subscription.But it's not just a chatbot that gives you text on a screen and answering your questions.It creates real files.real reports, real summaries, proposals, research documents, tables, and clean client -ready files generated from your notes, your documents, and your instructions.So if you've got a long document, a transcript, meeting notes, client notes, or research material, Nexus AI can help you turn that into something structured, and usable.

It can also build slides and presentations from a rough outline or notes or an existing document.So instead of staring at a blank page trying to work out how to turn your notes and your thoughts into a proper presentation, you can just give it to Nexus AI and it will build the structure for you.Nexus also has AI agents that can do repetitive tasks for you with absolutely no coding required whatsoever.Once you set it up, you just let it run.And importantly, Nexus will connect and work with tools and files that you already use such as Google Drive, Slack, SharePoint, Confluence and more.Meaning the AI is working from your context not from a blank page.

So if you want to get started with AI or you are tired of paying for several tools at once you can get up to 76 % off using my link which is nexus .ai slash BBB linked in the description below.So up to 76 %off using my link nexus .ai slashai slash BBB.I'll put that down below.

It really is a fantastic tool to work with.

Okay so now we need to talk about digital ID and you might ask me how does this link with Elon Musk commenting on British politics and Keir Starmer and vice versa and whatever but it is all intrinsically linked.Allow me to explain because this particular row is over Elon Musk and supposedly interfering in British politics.He owns the platform.There's complaints about alleged misinformation and division and everything else.But all at the same time, this government is trying to bring in, or it insists it's bringing in, a digital ID, and they are trying to force it in one way or another.And in my view, the future of free speech is not only whether you are allowed to speak freely, it's It is about whether the systems you use to speak, to work, to travel, bank and everything else... and live your life increasingly require verification, identity and traceability and tracking your every move.

Because today's complaint is Elon Musk is whipping up division on eggs.Tomorrow, the argument will almost certainly be anonymous accounts online are whipping up division.And then, of course, unverified users are spreading misinformation.

And then the platforms must know who those users are.Therefore, digital ID can solve the problem.

And then suddenly a system that has been sold to you as a convenient way to access public services becomes part of a much broader architecture of control and tracking.So they know exactly who you are and exactly what you're doing and exactly what you're saying.Now, not every part of digital ID is going to be inherently evil, but in a political culture, which is increasingly obsessed

with harm and misinformation, interference, division, safety, approved speech, digital ID becomes more than just an ID tool.

It becomes the missing link between you and your speech that they want to connect.They want to connect your speech with you.And that is how they connect you to everything else.And once everything is connected and linked together and traceable, it is not just, am I allowed to say this?It is, can I say this without being tracked and profiled and restricted and deplatformed, delayed, flagged, or somehow quietly punished?Maybe you'll lose access to your banking overnight because they've tracked something that you've said online.

Because the people who are telling you not to worry about your free speech and that we have free speech in the UK, we've had it for a very long time and we'll be proud of it and we will have it for a long time, Keir Starmer, are the same people who are building the systems that may decide one day how free your speech really is.

But here's a very stark observation that I've developed, which you may agree with, you may disagree with, but I doubt it.If digital ID is truly voluntary, which they assure us that it is, why is the country being redesigned around digital verification?

The old way of doing things was, show me your documents, bring in the documents, and you can produce them, you can prove them, and all of that sort of stuff.Now, it's tap here to continue and to verify your specific ID.

And in that sense, I strongly believe we are going to get to a point where you will have to have digital ID to access pretty much everything.We already have it to access NHS services and various other things.The banks are going through their own versions of digital ID.

We've got one to go through for Companies House that we have to go through.And it's only a matter of time before they all say, well, let's just rely on the government's one.and if you can't do that I'm sorry today you can't access your bank or your dentist or send your child to school because we don't know who you are.We'll need to verify who you are with this digital ID and therefore you're going to have to get one.It's voluntary but you just can't do any of these things otherwise and at the same time that might then extend to these platforms and they might interweave it into the legislation such as the online safety act and they might say well you're going to have to have it so we can prove who you are otherwise you won't be able to take part in these things again and one of the warning signs for that is when they're trying to ban social media for under 16s which in itself is a contradiction because on the one hand they want to ban social media for under 16s but they also want 16 year olds to be able to vote Presumably with no clue about what's going on because they won't be able to access the news about what's going on.

A lot of which is now through social media in one form or another.So all of that they're going to have to implement and control, monitor, track, trace and enforce.And how are they going to do that?They're going to have to know who you are.So these are the inevitable consequences of what they are pushing through.So we really do need to maintain our free speech because if we don't maintain it, we are simply going to lose it.

So let me know your thoughts and comments in the box below.

And as always, thank you for watching.