Blog

ADL Regional Director Calls for Government-Regulated Online Censorship

The Anti-Defamation League’s David Goldenberg is demanding a broad overhaul of how speech is governed on the internet, calling for both government intervention and intensified corporate censorship. In a recent appearance, Goldenberg, who heads the ADL’s Midwest operations, expressed frustration over what he sees as declining efforts by tech firms to suppress online content he deems hateful.

Citing Meta’s rollback of its fact-checking team in the United States, he argued that platforms must be forced to take action. “You have a platform like Meta that just gutted its entire fact-checking department…And so what we need to do is we need to apply pressure in a real significant way on tech platforms that they have a responsibility, that they have an absolute responsibility to check and remove hateful speech that is inciteful.”

Goldenberg advocated not just for voluntary moderation, but for legislative and regulatory measures, both at the federal and state level, that would compel platforms to act as speech enforcers. He pointed to efforts in states like California as examples of where local governments are already testing such models.

His concern centers around what he perceives as an ecosystem of radicalization made easily accessible by today’s digital infrastructure. He warned that extremist ideologies no longer require obscure forums or dark web communities to spread. “It used to be you had to fight going into the deep dark web… Now… it’s easier and easier to be exposed in the mainstream,” he said.

Framing the online environment as a catalyst for violence, Goldenberg argued that free access to controversial viewpoints must be curtailed. He called for social media companies to take a stronger stance by excluding users whose views fall outside accepted boundaries, adding that regulation should enforce this responsibility.

He zeroed in on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a critical piece of legislation that shields platforms from legal liability over user-posted content. “Congress needs to amend Section 230, which provides immunity to tech platforms right now for what happens,” Goldenberg said. He dismissed comparisons between modern platforms and telecommunications companies, referencing past remarks by Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg about how phone providers were not liable for threats made over calls. Goldenberg’s view was blunt: “These tech platforms are not guaranteed under the Constitution. They’re just not.”

From his perspective, private companies should be free to “kick people off, to de-platform,” and if they fail to do so voluntarily, they must be pressured or regulated into compliance. He described accountability as a mechanism for shaping behavior, stating, “Accountability is a tool that can be incredibly effective in changing behavior.”

Keep reading

Rubio Announces Visa Restrictions on Foreign Nationals Involved in Censoring Americans

Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced on May 28 new visa restrictions against foreign nationals involved in censoring the speech of U.S. citizens.

“For too long, Americans have been fined, harassed, and even charged by foreign authorities for exercising their free speech rights,” Rubio announced in a post on social media platform X.

“Today, I am announcing a new visa restriction policy that will apply to foreign officials and persons who are complicit in censoring Americans. Free speech is essential to the American way of life—a birthright over which foreign governments have no authority.”

Rubio said foreign nationals involved in suppressing the rights of Americans shouldn’t be allowed to visit the United States.

“Whether in Latin America, Europe, or elsewhere, the days of passive treatment for those who work to undermine the rights of Americans are over,” he said.

Keep reading

Inside America’s Hidden Power Network: NGOs, The CIA, And The Rise Of The Blob

Former State Department official and director of Foundation for Freedom Online Mike Benz sat down once again with Tucker Carlson, where he laid out a labyrinthine narrative about U.S. power and influence that should come as no surprise to those who have been paying attention. Benz described the role non-governmental organizations (NGOs), intelligence agencies, and private philanthropic empires have engaged in to quietly shape global and domestic affairs.

“NGOs are the stem cell of the government’s central nervous system,” Benz said, adding “They are this highly flexible tool…you can’t disentangle or really separate the government from the non-governmental organizations.”

According to Benz, the US often wields power through unofficial channels – increasingly through a network of publicly funded and privately directed institutions Benz dubbed “the Blob,” a term originally coined by Ben Rhodes, a former deputy national security advisor to President Obama.

According to Benz, the roots of this NGO influence structure go back to the early 20th century, with the 1913 introduction of the income tax and the subsequent 1917 law making contributions to charities tax-deductible. This opened a floodgate of elite philanthropy which, during World War II and the Cold War, merged with U.S. intelligence objectives.

“In 1948,” said Benz, “the CIA achieved its first covert operation: rigging the Italian election by working through trade unions, charity fronts, and other non-profits.” He cited a now-declassified memo by diplomat George Kennan, who described the need for a “Bureau of Political Warfare” and endorsed a system where covert influence would appear to originate from civil society.

Benz divided the “Blob” into three strata: official government actors (State Department, Pentagon, CIA, USAID), a network of NGOs funded and coordinated by these agencies, and the “donor-drafter class” – high-net-worth individuals like George Soros and Bill Gates, whose foundations shape U.S. foreign policy priorities.

Keep reading

When City Hall Chooses the Mob

In Seattle last weekend, violence broke out—not from the pulpit, but from the pavement.

Pastors and churchgoers, gathered for a permitted worship event in a city park, found themselves besieged by a black-clad mob who attempted to tear down fencing, rush the stage, and shout them down.

The attackers were not counter-protesters in any constitutional sense of the word. They were masked militants whose tactics have become a hallmark of Antifa: organized, aggressive, and aimed not at persuasion but suppression.

To their credit, the Seattle police intervened. Arrests were made. Barricades held. For a moment, law reasserted itself in a city too long governed by hesitation.

Then came the mayor.

Bruce Harrell, elected to lead but seemingly content to triangulate, did not respond with praise for law enforcement or a reaffirmation of Seattle’s civic obligations to neutrality and free expression.

Instead, he questioned the Christian group’s presence—why they had been issued a permit and why their event had not been relocated to a “less provocative” area.

Translated: The fault lies not with the mob—heaven forbid—but those who dared to speak within earshot of it.

This goes beyond appeasement or failed civic leadership. The mayor effectively signaled that the rule of law in Seattle is conditional—and that those who assault Christians may expect indulgence, while those who dare to preach in public may expect scrutiny.

Harrell’s statement is a masterclass in moral evasion. It nods toward “anarchists,” then downplays their aggression with sanitized language like “infiltrated” and “disrupted”—as if masked militants had simply wandered in with the breeze.

Rather than commend his officers or affirm the constitutional right of peaceful assembly, Harrell issued a statement directing the Parks Department to reexamine the permitting process and urging the police to produce an after-action report focused on crowd management tactics and the arrests themselves.

The subtext was unmistakable: those arrested may soon be recast as misunderstood protesters, and the officers who protected the event could find themselves under internal review.

In Seattle, even enforcing the law can become grounds for investigation—if you defend the wrong group.

The mayor then implies that the real danger lies in “far-right” speech held in a historically LGBTQ+ neighborhood. In other words, the public square is now zoned for ideology.

Speech rights may exist on paper but are conditional—revocable if your message strays from the orthodoxy or irritates Seattle’s cringeworthy Mayor LaTrivia, always eager with bureaucratic balm for the mob’s bruised feelings.

Keep reading

WNBA Investigation Confirms Claims of ‘Monkey Chants’ Targeting Angel Reese Were Another Race Hoax

The WNBA announced on Tuesday that its investigation found no evidence to support claims of “racist fan behavior” at a recent matchup between the Chicago Sky and the Indiana Fever in Indianapolis.

This update comes nine days after the league launched a probe into accusations that Chicago Sky forward Angel Reese had been subjected to “hateful fan comments” during the game.

“We have investigated the report of racist fan behavior in the vicinity of the court during the May 17, 2025 Chicago Sky at Indiana Fever game,” the WNBA said in a statement.

“Based on information gathered to date, including from relevant fans, team and arena staff, as well as audio and video review of the game, we have not substantiated it.”

Keep reading

Justices Alito, Thomas blast SCOTUS for passing on censorship of ‘only two genders’ student

When the Supreme Court put the onus on states to set their own abortion policies with 2022’s Dobbs ruling, it unexpectedly subjected pro-life activists and their legislative allies to an onslaught of abortion-expansion proposals that made it into even red states’ laws, with a pro-life research group concluding last week that abortions are rising.

By passing on a case that sought to protect student expression that questions gender ideology from censorship in public schools, SCOTUS may similarly send free speech, gender-critical, religious freedom, conservative and pro-life advocates scrambling at the state and school district levels to protect nondisruptive speech at odds with progressive shibboleths.

The high court Tuesday turned away pleas from those advocates and Republican state attorneys general to hear and reverse the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling against Liam Morrison, upholding his Massachusetts middle school’s ban on wearing shirts that read “there are only two genders” and, after his first punishment, “there are only censored genders.” 

First Circuit Chief Judge David Barron – previously a Justice Department lawyer known for secretly advising the president who later nominated him that Barack Obama could legally kill Americans by drone strike – had portrayed the issue as a matter of judicial deference.

Keep reading

The Net Zero Agenda’s Continued Collapse Into Chaos

Last week, Ofgem announced that the Energy Price Cap would be lowered. From July, average bill payers will see “a decrease of 7% compared to the cap set between April 1st to June 30th, 2025”. The likes of Ed Miliband were quick to capture the good news by reaffirming the Government’s commitment to the 2050 Net Zero and 2030 Clean Power agendas. But a closer look at the detail of the price cut and other news shows just how fragile those agendas really are.

The news that there would be a price cut was not unexpected. Energy price caps are announced quarterly. As reported here, the Spring (April-June) price cap rise was announced in February – the third since the Labour Government was elected in July last year on the promise of “lower bills”. “Energy bills are set to rise again due to a spike in global gas markets,” claimed Ed Miliband ahead of Ofgem’s February rise. But there is no such thing as “global gas markets”. And that “spike” had already passed.

A post-pandemic low price of gas on UK markets had occurred in February 2024 at around 56p per therm (29.3 kWh). But over the next year, this price increased to 142p, peaking on February 11th. On February 25th, Ofgem announced a 6.4% price cap increase for the second quarter of this year. But by the time of Ofgem’s announcement, a mere fortnight later, the price had fallen to 106p – a fall of 25%. Into the second quarter, the price fell further, reaching a low of 69p – or less than half of February’s spike price – on April 7th. The price then stabilised at around 83p (around 42% of the peak price).

“It’s great news the energy price cap is going down, but we have more to do”, tweeted Ed Milband in response to last week’s announcement from Ofgem – as if he and his policies had caused the price drop. “Our clean power mission is the route to long-term energy security and lower bills,” he added. Odd, isn’t it, that a 6.4% increase in the cap was blamed on (non-existent) “global gas markets”, but that a 7% drop in the cap, following a 42% reduction in UK gas prices, is not blamed on the same outside forces, but is instead given as cause to double down on the green agenda.

The clues are there for those whose capacity for simple maths is not hindered by green ideology… a 42% reduction in UK gas prices yielded only a 7% drop in the energy price cap. But doesn’t Miliband tell us that “global gas prices” are the cause of all our problems? 

And not just Milband. In the Times, the Green Blob’s favourite du jour talking point is reproduced uncritically by the newspaper’s Energy Editor, Emily Gosden. “Unlinking electricity prices from gas ‘would cut energy bills’,” claims the headline. According to this meme, remastered by energy market consultant Adam Bell, formerly Head of Energy Strategy at BEIS and Senior Policy Advisor at DECC, the “link” between gas prices and electricity prices could be “cut”. According to the article, “Britain’s wholesale market operates on a system of ‘marginal pricing’ whereby the most expensive plant needed to keep the lights on determines the price all generators are paid”.

Keep reading

American Backlash: Why the Letitia James Mortgage Fraud Investigation Resonates with Americans

“We’re going to definitely sue him. We’re going to be a real pain in the ass. He’s going to know my name personally,” Letitia James said during her 2018 campaign for New York attorney general.

James campaigned openly on her intention to target President Donald Trump, describing him as an “illegitimate president” and an “embarrassment,” while pledging to pursue all legal avenues to scrutinize his finances and real estate transactions. After being elected, she said, “I look forward to seeing him in court when I assume my new position.”

Upon taking office in 2019, James promptly followed through, filing a lawsuit that ultimately led to a $454 million civil judgment against Trump and his organization for allegedly “overvaluing assets” on mortgage applications – despite industry-standard disclaimers advising lenders to conduct their own valuations.

But despite all of James’ efforts to harm him politically, Donald Trump won the presidency in a landslide in 2024. What happened?

Keep reading

Ex-flight attendant caught smuggling 100 lbs. of deadly new drug made of human bones faces decades in prison

A former flight attendant caught smuggling over 100 pounds of a deadly new synthetic drug made of human bones faces up to 25 years in a Sri Lankan prison.

Charlotte May Lee, 21, from the United Kingdom, was seized at Bandaranaike Airport in the Sri Lankan capital of Colombo earlier this month after allegedly carrying suitcases full of “kush,” a new drug originating in West Africa which kills an estimated dozen people a week in Sierra Leone alone.

Lee, from south London, claimed the drug stash — which has a reported street value of $3.3 million — was planted in her suitcases without her knowledge, her lawyer, Sampath Perera, told the BBC.

She is being held in harsh conditions in a jail north of Colombo where she has to sleep on a concrete floor, though Perera said she’s been in contact with her family.

The haul made on May 12 is the biggest seizure of the relatively new drug in Sri Lankan history.

Keep reading

Meet The Mortgage Company Enabling Illegal Immigrants To Buy American Homes

After decades of mass illegal immigration into the United States, untold millions of illegal aliens have settled throughout the country, competing with Americans for government benefits, jobs, and now, for homes.

For most illegal aliens, obtaining a mortgage from a traditional bank — without a social security number or a credit score — is nearly impossible. But as millions of illegal aliens flooded the country, a new industry has cropped up to capitalize on the new customer base, selling financing catered to the illegal population.

One entity at the forefront of this industry, a Daily Wire investigation has revealed, is Prysma Lending, which has given out more than a billion dollars in loans in red and blue states alike as it blatantly targets illegal aliens.

Trump pledged to ban mortgages for illegal aliens on the campaign trail and his administration took action in March to prevent government-backed mortgages from going to illegal aliens. But Prysma is one of several companies — including Colony Ridge, the Texas development that The Daily Wire exposed as a magnet for illegal aliens — that uses a different financial tactic that isn’t impacted by the administration’s recent rule change, which specifically targeted loans backed by the Federal Housing Administration.

The company prides itself on “empowering the Latino community to achieve homeownership” in its Spanish-language Instagram bio. The company’s president, Monica Serva, says she started Prysma with the intent of “helping the Latino community” because she “realized how unfairly minorities were treated.”

But Prysma revealed that its business model relied on illegal aliens, in particular, when it hosted a webinar with an immigration lawyer to answer their customers’ questions about the risk of deportation in the days following President Donald Trump’s inauguration.

The company is evidently concerned that its clientele could be deported, or at least that potential customers could be dissuaded from buying a home in a country that they fear they could be removed from.

Keep reading