Blog

Australia enforces world’s harshest social media age crackdown

Australia is introducing the world’s toughest rules to keep children off social media, with platforms facing fines of up to $49.5 million if they fail to detect and remove underage users.

From December 10, social media companies must actively identify and deactivate accounts belonging to users under 16, block re-registration attempts, and provide proper appeals processes. Communications Minister Anika Wells has unveiled a list of “reasonable steps” platforms such as TikTok, Snapchat, Instagram, Facebook and YouTube must follow.

The measures demand that age assurance technology not be a “set-and-forget” system and cannot rely solely on self-declaration. Platforms are encouraged to adopt a layered or “waterfall approach” using multiple checks across the user experience to detect underage accounts. They must also remove existing accounts “with care and clear communication” and provide accessible review options for those who believe they were wrongly flagged.

Wells and controversial eSafety commissioner Julie Inman Grant will present the guidance directly to tech companies during a visit to the United States later this month. After trials proved the technology exists to meet the requirements, Wells said there is no excuse for companies to fall short.

Keep reading

So Much for the Nobel Peace Prize

The first seven months of Donald Trump’s second term as president has seen a remarkable transformation. In his inaugural address, Trump said that “My proudest legacy will be that of a peacemaker and unifier.” He promised to “measure our success not only by the battles we win but also by the wars that we end – and perhaps most importantly, the wars we never get into.” “That’s what I want to be,” Trump said, “a peacemaker.”

Seven months later, Trump changed the name of the Department of Defense to the Department of War. It is not just a change of name. It is a change of “attitude,” that rebrands the image the Trump administration wants to project to the world. Trump’s executive order says the name change “conveys a stronger message of readiness and resolve compared to ‘Department of Defense,’ which emphasizes only defensive capabilities.”

From 1789 until 1949, the department was named the Department of War. As the Department of War, the U.S. won every war, Trump said. “And then we decided to go woke, and we changed the name to Department of Defense,” Trump said.” Pete Hegseth, whose sign on his door was quickly changed to “Secretary of War,” says that the U.S. is “going to go on offense, not just on defense. Maximum lethality, not tepid legality. Violent effect, not politically correct. We’re going to raise up warriors, not just defenders.” That is not the language of a President or an administration that wants to be remembered as “a peacemaker” that is judged by “the wars that we end” and “the wars we never get into.”

Donald Trump has made no secret of his ambition to win a Nobel Peace Prize. He has brought it up and campaigned for it in interview after interview and speech after speech. In June, Trump took to Truth Social to boast of his role in brokering peace between the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Rwanda. “I won’t get a Nobel Peace Prize for this, I won’t get a Nobel Peace Prize for stopping the War between India and Pakistan, I won’t get a Nobel Peace Prize for stopping the War between Serbia and Kosovo, I won’t get a Nobel Peace Prize for keeping Peace between Egypt and Ethiopia… and I won’t get a Nobel Peace Prize for doing the Abraham Accords in the Middle East… No, I won’t get a Nobel Peace Prize no matter what I do, including Russia/Ukraine, and Israel/Iran… but the people know, and that’s all that matters to me.”

But the change of names to the Department of War betrays that campaign. And it is more than just a change of name. The rebrand reflects the ever bloating role of the military in the Trump administration to push out diplomacy and law enforcement. Trump pushed aside diplomacy that was working with Iran with an unprecedented bombing of Iran’s civilian nuclear facilities. And he has pushed aside law enforcement with military action against drug cartels in Latin America.

On September 2, the U.S. claims to have identified a speed boat that was running drugs for a Venezuelan drug cartel. They did not turn to law enforcement, as has, until now, been standard operating procedure by having the National Guard interdict the boat and arrest the suspected drug smugglers. Instead, either an attack helicopter or an MQ-9 Reaper drone fired on it, killing all 11 of its crew. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, speaking for an administration that wants to be a “peacemaker” that is judged by “the wars we never get into,” explained that “What will stop them is when we blow up and get rid of them.”

In order to prevent the flow of drugs into the United States, Trump and his Department of War have sent three Aegis guided-missile destroyers, several P-8 spy planes and at least one nuclear-powered fast attack submarine. Apparently insufficient to deal with the problem, the U.S. has now sent ten F-35 fighter jets to Puerto Rico to help carry out the operation against the drug cartels.

Keep reading

Speaker Johnson Blocks Massie’s Attempt To Repeal The Smith-Mundt Modernization Act

Since ascending to the seat of Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson has had a tumultuous tenure that has raised serious questions about how committed Republican leadership is to disrupting the political establishment in Washington, DC, which it promised to vanquish. Ironically, the controversies that have marred his leadership the most have not been initiated by partisan opposition from the left. Instead, the most formidable challenges to Johnson have come from within the Republican Party itself. Representative Thomas Massie, who in stark juxtaposition has earned a reputation as one of the few members of Congress with any integrity, has proven to be Johnson’s greatest adversary in that struggle.From his crusade to prevent Johnson’s re-election to the seat at the head of the House of Representatives to his mission to bring transparency to the debacle over the release of the Epstein Files™, Massie’s efforts have painted the Speaker in the light of someone who has used the promise of putting America first as a vehicle for political expediency rather than as a testament to his commitment to the American people.

By actually fighting against the corrupt Washington establishment, Massie’s efforts have shown just how much Congress is still at odds with the American people under Johnson’s leadership. The congressman’s recent effort to repeal legislation that legalizes the use of state-sanctioned propaganda against the American citizens by their own government is the latest episode in the saga between Massie and Johnson. Massie’s revelation that his attempt to repeal the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act was blocked by Speaker Johnson amplifies concerns about whose interests are being fought for by Congress and how committed Republican leadership is to delivering on its promises to provide the public with greater transparency and integrity of the rule of law.

Keep reading

Endless Wars and Misguided Intelligence: Rethinking US Foreign Policy

For decades, the United States has been drawn into military interventions far from its borders, consuming trillions of dollars in taxpayer money and putting thousands of American service members in harm’s way. These conflicts – from Afghanistan to Iraq, and now the specter of confrontation with Iran – illustrate a recurring failure of U.S. foreign policy: the tendency to act on incomplete, misleading, or politically convenient intelligence.

One of the clearest patterns is how external actors can manipulate American decision-making. In the lead-up to the Iraq War, figures like Ahmed Chalabi provided information that exaggerated the threat posed by Saddam Hussein. Those claims, as we now know, proved to be baseless – there were no stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction. Yet the narrative took root, steering Washington into a war that cost thousands of American lives, destabilized an entire region, and drained U.S. resources that could have been devoted to pressing domestic needs.

Similarly, in the case of Iran, opposition groups such as the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) offered claims regarding Iran’s nuclear program that were later amplified in U.S. political and media circles. While these groups presented themselves as allies against hostile regimes, their primary objective was to advance their own agendas, not American national interests. Policymakers who rely on such sources risk committing the country to conflicts that serve others while imposing heavy costs on U.S. citizens.

The consequences of these interventions are measurable and enduring. Beyond the immediate loss of life, wars divert critical resources from domestic priorities, undermine public trust in government, and entrench cycles of instability abroad. Relying on partisan or ideologically motivated intelligence prevents an accurate assessment of threats and alternatives, leading to decisions that are reactive, costly, and often counterproductive.

It is imperative that the United States reassess the criteria for military engagement. Intelligence must be rigorously verified, independent of actors with self-serving motives, and embedded within a broader strategic framework that prioritizes diplomacy, regional stability, and the protection of American citizens and service members. Blindly following narratives designed to provoke intervention undermines both national security and moral responsibility.

Ultimately, true national strength is demonstrated not by the number of conflicts waged overseas, but by the ability to pursue peace, restraint, and reasoned foreign policy. U.S. leadership should emphasize negotiation, conflict prevention, and multilateral engagement, ensuring that resources are invested in building stability rather than perpetuating endless wars.

Keep reading

Washington Projects Its Drug Problem Onto Latin America

A big Cadillac limo with Jersey plates was parked down the block. Few locals in East Harlem even owned cars, let alone new ones. Curious, I asked the street kids what’s up. They casually explained that the mafioso come weekly to collect their drug money. Later I found a playground, which served as a veritable narcotics flea market each night. If a blanquito from the suburbs and some third graders could uncover the illicit trade, I wondered why the officials – who plastered the city with “keep New York drug free” signs – couldn’t do the same.

That was in the late 1960s, and I am still wondering why the US – the world’s largest consumer of narcotics, the biggest money launderer of illicit drug money, and the leading weaponry supplier to the cartels – hasn’t resolved these problems.

One thing is clear: the drug issue is projected onto Latin America. White House spokesperson Anna Kelly warned of “evil narco terrorists [trying] to poison our homeland.” Drug interdiction has been weaponized as an excuse to impose imperial domination, most notably against Venezuela.

Since Hugo Chávez was elected Venezuela’s president in 1998 and initiated the Bolivarian Revolution – a movement that catalyzed the Pink Tide in Latin America and galvanized a counter-hegemonic wave internationally – Washington has tried to crush it. In 2015, then-US President Barack Obama accused Venezuela of being an “extraordinary threat” to US national security when, in fact, the opposite was the case; the US threatened Venezuela.

Obama imposed unilateral coercive measures – euphemistically called “sanctions.” Each subsequent administration renewed and, to varying degrees, intensified the sanctions, which are illegal under international law, in a bipartisan effort. But the imperial objective of regime change was thwarted by the political leadership of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in concert with the country’s people and in firm alliance with their military.

Now that draconian sanctions have “failed” to achieve regime-change, President Trump dispatched an armada of warships, F-35 stealth aircraft, and thousands of troops to increase the pressure.

Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro responded: “What Washington wants is to control Venezuela’s wealth [including the world’s largest oil reserves]. That is the reason why the US deployed warships, aircraft, missiles and a nuclear submarine near Venezuelan coasts under the pretext of fighting drug trafficking.”

Maduro maintains his country is free of drug production and processing, citing reports from the United Nations, the European Union, and even the US Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA). The Venezuelan president could have also referenced the findings of Trump’s own security agencies absolving him from the charge of directing the Tren de Aragua drug cartel.

And, speaking of collusion with drug cartels, Maduro could have commented on the DEA itself, which was expelled from Venezuela in 2005 for espionage. Regardless, the DEA has continued to secretly build drug trafficking cases against Venezuela’s leaders in knowing violation of international law, according to an Associated Press report.

Venezuelan Vice President Delcy Rodríguez highlights that the DEA “has known connections with the drug trafficking world.” For example, an investigation by the US Department of Justice, revealed that at least ten DEA agents in Colombia participated in repeated “sex parties” with prostitutes paid for by local drug cartels. In 2022 the DEA quietly removed its Mexico chief for maintaining improper contacts with cartels. This underscores a troubling pattern: DEA presence tends to coincide with major drug activity, but does not eliminate it.

The US “is not interested in addressing the serious public health problem its citizens face due to high drug use,” Maduro reminds us. He points out that drug trafficking profits remain in the US banking system. In fact, illicit narcotics are a major US industry. Research by the US Army-funded RAND Corporation reveals that narcotics rank alongside pharmaceuticals and oil/gas as top US commodities.

Keep reading

Influence Operation? The EU Paid-Off €600,000 To Friendly Media Outlets Right After European Elections

While the European Union likes to throw out terms like “misinformation,” “disinformation,” and “influence campaigns,” the reality is that the EU is pumping millions into influencing public opinion itself. The difference is just that when Brussels does it, it is not supposed to be propaganda.

One European politician, MEP Petr Bystron, has revealed that the EU commission has provided Financial support to the American investigative network Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) right after the 2024 EU elections. Major German news outlets like Spiegel, Zeit, and Süddeutsche Zeitung belong to the group, which is the world’s largest network of investigative media.

These outlets are known for their hit pieces on conservative and right-wing parties, often at opportune times. Notably, Spiegel and Süddeutsche Zeitung’s reporting in 2019 on the Ibiza Affair scandal — which involved an undercover video of the Freedom Party of Austria (FPÖ) party’s leader — led to the toppling of the Austrian government at the time, which included the FPÖ. Many critics believed that due to the sophistication of the operation, which included an undercover actress, intelligence services may have played a role.

The OCCRP group was founded in 2006 and is most well known for publishing the “Panama Papers” and the “Azerbaijan Laundromat” evasion scandals.

After a massive flow of U.S. money was cut off to key European establishment outlets and NGOs, Brussels is stepping in to fill the gap. Namely, the Trump administration ended the massive levels of funding headed towards foreign organizations, particularly from USAID, which allowed them to pump out pro-EU and left-wing content to wide swathes of the population across Europe.

The OCCRP group has received an extraordinary amount of money from U.S. taxpayers and other U.S. sources. According to French outlet Mediapart, the group received nearly $50 million from U.S. sources, but these funders were not just generous donors. They also could dictate editorial agendas and veto staff appointments.

Two journalists from NDR, a German state media network, questioned just how independent the OCCRP is in a 2024 report.

The two determined that a significant portion of the money was coming from American funds, particularly from USAID. OCCRP was funneling content and material to German media outlets like Spiegel, Zeit, and Süddeutsche Zeitung.

Keep reading

Billionaire Bill Ackman convened stormy Israel ‘intervention’ with Charlie Kirk, sources say

A month before Charlie Kirk’s killing, billionaire pro-Israel moneyman Bill Ackman arranged an intervention in the Hamptons during which sources say he and others “hammered” Kirk for the conservative leader’s growing criticism of Israeli influence in Washington. Kirk came away fretting about Israeli “blackmail,” sources say, as he contemplated a Catholic conversion.

On September 11, one day after the assassination of Charlie Kirk, billionaire pro-Israel moneyman Bill Ackman took to Twitter/X to trumpet his relationship with the late conservative operative. “I feel incredibly privileged to have spent a day and shared a meal with @charliekirk11 this summer. He was a giant of a man.”

The Grayzone has spoken to five people with intimate knowledge of Kirk’s meeting with Ackman, which was held in early August under the guise of a summertime Hamptons lunch. According to one source, Kirk was left upset after the gathering turned into an “intervention” where he was “hammered” for his increasingly skeptical views on the US special relationship with Israel, and for platforming prominent conservative critics of Israel at his TPUSA events.

Keep reading

Western Countries Downing Russian Drones Over Ukraine Will Mean War With NATO: Medvedev

Security Council Deputy Chairman Dmitry Medvedev has once again issued a firm warning to the Western military alliance backing Kiev, saying that if NATO countries begin shooting down Russian drones over Ukraine during the ‘special military operation’, this will put Moscow at war with NATO.

The words come dangerously after the last week has seen Russian drones allegedly breach Polish and Romanian airspace – both NATO member’s along the alliance’s ‘eastern flank’. Moscow has rejected accusations that it intentionally sent these drones, which were by and large ‘decoy’ UAVs amid broader drone waves targeting inside Ukraine.

“Seriously, implementing the provocative idea of Kiev and other idiots to create a ‘no-fly zone over Ukraine’ and allowing NATO countries to down our drones will mean only one thing: NATO’s war with Russia,” Medvedev wrote on Telegram Monday.

He additionally remarked the “powerful European initiative ‘Eastern Sentry’” amuses him as it “seems to be all that remains of the ‘coalition of the willing’.”

Over the weekend, a pair of Russian drones were observed and tracked in Romania’s airspace, near Ukraine’s southern border, the Romanian military said. A pair of F-16s were scrambled, but the pilots refrained from firing on them and they exited back to Ukraine territory.

The former Russian president also made comments aimed at Estonian Defense Minister Hanno Pevkur. He is visiting Ukraine. “An Estonian defense minister has arrived in Kiev. He is threatening. The smaller the country, the more aggressive and foolish its leaders tend to be,” Medvedev noted.

All the while, Ukraine has continued its cross-border drone attacks on Russian territory. Belgorod oblast authorities said two women in a village near the border with Ukraine were killed in such an attack Monday morning.

Three other people were injured and a vehicle was destroyed, following a night where anti-air defenses were able to intercept six of the inbound drone wave.

The hawks keep pushing for more muscle and present delusional views on the current status of the conflict…

Keep reading

“I’ve Never Experienced Crime Of This Magnitude Before”: 20-Year Veteran Austrian Police Spox

More than 30 victims of a Syrian youth gang, known as “505,” have been recorded n the cities of Graz and Vienna.

The suspects range in age from 17 to 20, with police reporting they dealt a “severe blow” to the group with mass arrests.

“I’ve never experienced a dimension (of crime) of this magnitude before, and I’ve been in this business for 20 years,” said police spokesman Fritz Grundnig.

The organized gang is accused of a long series of extremely violent assaults between November 2024 and June 2025, mostly in Graz. Styrian police have released details to the national media about the group, including their involvement in the narcotics trade.

“A total of over 20 crimes have been reported, with over 30 victims injured and assaulted by this gang,” said Grundnig.

“The men are suspected of having intentionally committed grievous bodily harm, aggravated assault, robberies, dangerous threats, and coercion in Graz since the end of 2024, with varying degrees of involvement, and of having joined forces in a criminal organization,” an additional press release reads. The investigation revealed that the “505” group used blunt and stabbing weapons. Among the victims were minors, according to media outlet Die Presse.

Despite the gang being focused in Graz, a number of arrests were made in Vienna as well.

Many victims faced extreme violence.

“For example, in June, the group stabbed another man at Griesplatz. He suffered a stab wound in the thigh,” Grundnig reported.

The police spokesperson also said that the gang is involved in the narcotics trade.

“During the house searches, which were of course carried out as part of this operation, a considerable quantity of drugs was found,” he stated.

The gang apparently named itself after another Arab clan gang, which participated in brutal clashes between Chechens, Turks, and Syrians, who gathered under the name 505 or 505/515, in Vienna in 2024.

Those clashes saw gun battles, multiple stabbings, and routine violence.

Keep reading

Virginia Imam: ‘World a Better Place’ Without Charlie Kirk Who ‘Died Disrespecting Black People’

The world is “a better place” without Charlie Kirk, according to Virginia Imam Ismail Saleem, who accused the recently slain conservative activist of having died “disrespecting black people” and thus unworthy of sympathy, as he declared that the Turning Point USA founder is “getting what he deserves” and the grief of his supporters “makes me smile.”

In a Friday sermon in Norfolk, Virginia, Islamic preacher Ismail Saleem spoke to the congregation, slamming both Kirk and those expressing sympathy over his death, accusing mourners of misplaced morality.

“You see, the problem today is with empathy. And the problem that we see currently in these last couple of days is the empathy is for the family and friends of the racist person [Charlie Kirk],” he stated. “Does anybody hope that this man’s children grow up to be like him or continue his legacy and his work?”

“Some people empathize because they are not good people themselves,” he added.

In the clip, published by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), which specializes in monitoring sermons and media in Arabic and Islamic communities, Saleem’s comments escalate further.

“He died disrespecting black people, so I don’t care about him at all,” Saleem said. “The world is a better place without him.” 

Saleem, who showed no remorse for his stance, doubled down on his reaction to Kirk’s death.

“He gets what he deserves — he’s getting what he deserves — right now,” he continued. “And it makes me smile. Their tears make me smile. Their anger makes me smile.”

The Norfolk mosque leader also attacked the notion of empathy toward Kirk’s family and friends, stating that many people are ignoring what he claims are far greater tragedies.

Keep reading