Gab Banned

 

See here for essential background: https://hpanwo-tv.blogspot.com/2025/04/bitchute-banned.html.
I have predicted that Bitchute was only going to be the first in a series of victims once the Online "Safety" Act started biting. I wondered which rebel would be disappeared next. Not the one I would have bet; it's Gab. The reason why I didn't think Gab would be an easy target is because of Andrew Torba's defiant retort to the UK government that I describe in the background link above. On Wednesday night I tried to access Gab.com and was greeted with a special page just like Bitchute's that has a picture of a Union Jack. It begins: "ATTENTION: UK Visitor Detected. The following notice applies specifically to users accessing from the United Kingdom.". It goes on: "Access Restricted by Provider. After receiving yet another demand from the UK's speech police, Ofcom, Gab has made the decision to block the entire United Kingdom from accessing our website. This latest email from Ofcom ordered us to disclose information about our users and operations. We know where this leads, compelled censorship and British citizens thrown in jail for 'hate speech.' We refuse to comply with this tyranny. Gab is an American company with zero presence in the UK. Ofcom's demands have no legal force here. To enforce anything in the United States, they'd need to go through a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty request or letters rogatory. No US court is going to enforce a foreign censorship regime. The First Amendment forbids it. Ofcom will likely try to make an example of us anyway. That's because the UK's Online Safety Act isn't about protecting children. It's about suppressing dissent. They're welcome to try. The idea that a British regulator can pressure a US company that's IP-blocking the entire UK is as farcical as it is futile. If anything, it proves our point, censorship doesn't work. It only reveals the truth about the censors. We proudly join platforms like Bitchute in boycotting the United Kingdom. American companies should follow suit. The power of the UK's parliament ends where the First Amendment begins. The only way to vote against the tyranny of the UK's present regime is to walk away from it, refuse to comply, and take refuge under the impervious shelter of the First Amendment. The UK's rulers want their people kept in the dark. Let them see how long the public tolerates it as their internet vanishes, one website at a time. This domain has been blocked for UK visitors." Source: https://uk.gab.com.

This is a very different message from Bitchute, despite them saying that they "proudly join platforms like Bitchute". Bitchute stated that they regretted making this decision and did so only because they felt compelled by the OSA's restrictions. They have made special allowances for British users so we can continue to create content within the dictates of the Act. Gab, however, are declaring a call to turn their back willingly on Britain out of a sense of righteous indignation. I can't see how that will help matters; it is kind of what the Starmer regime actually wants. I agree with Gab's sentiments, but I think this is a tactical error. It could be that this is just a temporary measure and there will be developments. Perhaps Andrew is playing some kind of 4D chess. I hope Gab can become accessible again because I do use it regularly. I'm not as involved in it as I was Bitchute, but I enjoy some of its material, have interacted with other users and have had conversations with them; as well as sharing links to all my publications. I know sometimes Gab is subjected to illegal activities, incitement to commit hate crimes etc; but doesn't this happen on all websites? Like Bitchute, as far as I can see they take their legal obligation seriously to remove such matter and report it. I think Andrew's heart is in the right place so I feel confident that he will end up doing the right thing eventually.
See here for background: https://hpanwo.blogspot.com/2021/08/political-correctness-portal.html.