Clare Melford, Imran Ahmed. Picture courtesy of Alamy | via BBC

 

Two British campaigners are among five individuals denied entry to the United States, with the US State Department alleging their involvement in efforts to pressure American tech platforms into suppressing free speech. Imran Ahmed, head of the Centre for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), and Clare Melford, CEO of the Global Disinformation Index (GDI), were labelled "radical activists" by the Trump administration. The Trump administration has also denied visas to a former EU commissioner from France and two key figures from a German anti-hate organisation.

 

The travel bans have sparked backlash, with European leaders condemning the measures. French President Emmanuel Macron characterised the decision as an attempt to "undermine European digital sovereignty." In contrast, the UK government asserted its support for maintaining a free internet while recognising the US's right to set visa regulations.

 

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio justified the visa denials as necessary to protect American sovereignty against a "global censorship-industrial complex." The narrative is further complicated by the CCDH's alleged collaboration with the Biden administration, resulting in Ahmed being labelled a "collaborator" by US officials, though BBC has reached out for a response.

 

The GDI, founded by Melford in 2018 to monitor disinformation, is accused by US authorities of using taxpayer funds to promote censorship. A GDI spokesperson called the visa sanctions "an authoritarian attack on free speech," denouncing the Trump administration's actions as "immoral, unlawful, and un-American."

 

French and German figures, including ex-EU tech chief Thierry Breton and leaders Anna-Lena von Hodenberg and Josephine Ballon of HateAid, also face similar travel bans. The measures are perceived as targeting those challenging US tech censorship policies, with Breton, creator of the EU's Digital Services Act (DSA), describing the situation as a "witch hunt." The ensuing conflict has resulted in response actions, including blocking European Commission advertisements on Musk’s platform, X.

 

Breton and other targeted individuals maintain their defiant stance, vowing to resist silence. The broader implications reflect a clash over content moderation, digital sovereignty, and the balancing of free speech with regulation, reported the BBC.

 

Key Takeaways

• Five European figures, including two British campaigners, have been banned from the US over alleged efforts to suppress free speech.
• The travel bans have received condemnation from European leaders, while the US describes the actions as necessary to protect sovereignty.
• The controversy highlights a larger conflict between US tech censorship policies and European digital sovereignty initiatives.

 

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from BBC 2025-12-26

 

 

 

23 minutes ago, webfact said:

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio justified the visa denials as necessary to protect American sovereignty against a "global censorship-industrial complex."

So censorship to protect against censorship.

 

American sovereignty over the world?

Imran Ahmed's detainment blocked by a judge.

 

https://www.reuters.com/world/judge-grants-injunction-blocking-us-detaining-british-anti-disinformation-2025-12-25/

Lock em up.

 

And keep Harry and the yacht loving valley girl.

 

Ellen will be back soon as well. UK is deporting the dross finally. 

 

Just need to handle the imports now.

 

 

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

Lock em up.

For which crime?

I can see why the US were wary of the Ahmed guy trying to pressurise American tech platforms into suppressing free speech.
Here he is arguing hate speech is anything that offends someone.

 

5 hours ago, nexus7 said:

I can see why the US were wary of the Ahmed guy trying to pressurise American tech platforms into suppressing free speech

So his free speech should be suppressed.

The hypocrisy is unreal. Free speech yeah, until you say something they don't like ROFLMAO 

1 minute ago, DonniePeverley said:

The hypocrisy is unreal. Free speech yeah, until you say something they don't like ROFLMAO 

You mean you think it's hypocritical for Trump to call out lack of free speech elsewhere but then claim that criticizing him is illegal? 

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/09/19/trump-no-longer-free-speech-00574219

 

I agree. Trump is complete garbage. 

It's amusing they are targeting EUrope with this free speech tirade ..... yet not a word against China and Russia - where literally most of these social media sites are banned - and there is no free speech. ROFLMAO 

 

Surely they must be aware of the hyprocrisy of what they are saying? Or are the general population out there that thick ?

 

Europe has a high degree of free speech - other than hateful abuse because of someones race or sex. If you have a problem with immigration then you have no issues to explain why in the UK (without resorting to being a racist).

 

Infact if anything Thailand has many subjects where there is no free speech either. Same with India - there are subjects you just cannot approach. 

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

So his free speech should be suppressed.

His version of free speech. Keep in mind people are being arrested for online posts by the droves for violating Britain's version of "free speech".

5 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

His version of free speech. Keep in mind people are being arrested for online posts by the droves for violating Britain's version of "free speech".

Which is related to this US ban how?

Maybe time the world started banning Americans and American produce?

27 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Which is related to this US ban how?

Did you not read the article. 'their involvement in efforts to pressure American tech platforms into suppressing free speech." they're about suppression of free speech which is currently on show for one all to see in Britain. These guys are woke activists.

13 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

Did you not read the article. 'their involvement in efforts to pressure American tech platforms into suppressing free speech." they're about suppression of free speech which is currently on show for one all in Britain. These guys are woke activists.

You perhaps need to read wider on the issue:

 

The U.S. administration is targeting individuals and organizations that are holding U.S. tech firms to account for disseminating hate speech, disinformation and other content that breaches UK and EU law.

 

The core of the issue is not ‘freedom of speech’ but sovereignty and the belief within the U.S. administration that tech companies must not be regulated in the societies that in which they operate.

 

The US does of course have the right not to regulate tech companies within the sovereign territory of the U.S.

 

Just as the EU has the same right within the EU territories and the UK within its own territory.

 

https://www.chosun.com/english/world-en/2025/12/27/DENUMJI7IVF4ZLUME35C6UXNUI/

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

hate speech, disinformation and other content that breaches UK and EU law.

What they DEEM to be hate speech and disinformation. Plenty of people in Britain I would suggest deny that their online posts are hate speech yet they are arrested. 

7 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

What they DEEM to be hate speech and disinformation. Plenty of people in Britain I would suggest deny that their online posts are hate speech yet they are arrested. 

In the UK 

3 minutes ago, stevenl said:

In the UK 

Yes and what is the thread about. These guys are advocating for the same in the US.

4 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

Yes and what is the thread about. These guys are advocating for the same in the US.

Nope. They're denied entry to the US for advocating limitations on hate speech in the EU and other European nations.

4 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Nope. They're denied entry to the US for advocating limitations on hate speech in the EU and other European nations.

Here it is. Pretty clear I would say. 

23 hours ago, webfact said:

Two British campaigners are among five individuals denied entry to the United States, with the US State Department alleging their involvement in efforts to pressure American tech platforms into suppressing free speech.

 

18 hours ago, stevenl said:

For which crime?

Just pull one out of thin air. The looney left/Biden admins legacy. No putting that genie back in the bottle.

2 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

Europe has a high degree of free speech - other than hateful abuse because of someones race or sex.

 

I consider trans and trans surgery abusive towards emotionally ill people. A perfectly valid opinion, and a fact, but I would be prosecuted for promoting that.

29 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

Here it is. Pretty clear I would say. 

 

Lol, nothing at all to do with free speech in the US. Trump is angry that the EU and other European countries are not allowing hate speech in the EU and other European countries on platforms from US tech companies like Meta and Twitter.

2 hours ago, dinsdale said:

His version of free speech. Keep in mind people are being arrested for online posts by the droves for violating Britain's version of "free speech".

 

What free speech usually means to Brits - is 'we want to be racist'. 

 

Let's see the main famous lady who was arrested ... during a protest where false information was going around that a killer was an asylum seeker -  was arrested for saying a hotel should be set on fire thus meaning all those inside iwould perish - something to that effect. 

 

She was not done for free speech violations, she was done for 'incitement'. That is pretty much illegal anywhere. 

 

Say that in Thailand see how far it gets you. Say it in Russia or China too. 

 

But bless free speech darlings. 

 

There is not a single country on this planet that has some restrictions on free speech. Europe by and large is pretty tolerant. 

 

2 hours ago, dinsdale said:

What they DEEM to be hate speech and disinformation. Plenty of people in Britain I would suggest deny that their online posts are hate speech yet they are arrested. 

Yes, people in the UK have differing views on what constitutes hate speech, though the actual definition is determined by UK law and breaches of that law is determined by UK courts and UK regulators.

 

The UK has sovereignty on these matters within the territory of the UK, the U.S. administration in hoc to big tech dies not.

2 hours ago, dinsdale said:

Yes and what is the thread about. These guys are advocating for the same in the US.

No they are not.

2 hours ago, dinsdale said:

Here it is. Pretty clear I would say. 

 

It’s pretty clear that it does not refer to ‘within the U.S.’.

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

Lol, nothing at all to do with free speech in the US. Trump is angry that the EU and other European countries are not allowing hate speech in the EU and other European countries on platforms from US tech companies like Meta and Twitter.

I think it’s more than that.

 

Trump is in hoc to big tech, the likes of Musk and Thiel believe their tech business should not be regulated by any government.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"You Are Banned From Entering The United States!"

 Big deal.  🏆
 

29 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I think it’s more than that.

 

Trump is in hoc to big tech, the likes of Musk and Thiel believe their tech business should not be regulated by any government.

Especially not a foreign government (the EU).

And I agree with them.