State Department finally shuts down ‘framework’ behind ‘censorship nerve center’ Rubio shuttered

The State Department confirmed it formally removed the “framework” underlying both the Global Engagement Center, deemed the government’s “censorship nerve center” by a first-term Trump administration official and defunded by Congress after the 2024 election, and GEC’s surreptitious successor Counter Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference Hub, which Secretary Marco Rubio shut down in April.

Acting Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs Darren Beattie told The Daily Wire there were “loose ends” to tie up, including GEC’s agreements with other countries to “facilitate and provide a framework for cooperation on mutual objectives, including principally combating so-called ‘disinformation,’” which sometimes turned out to be domestic and often consisted of disfavored narratives.

Beattie said GEC used an “indirect approach to censorship whereby they would fund third-party organizations that would engage in activity from facilitating the demonetization of conservative sites to generally castigating certain narrative perspectives on COVID, on immigration, on foreign policy, as simply malign as a matter of foreign influence when in fact these were entirely legitimate points of view that often came from Americans.”

His office is conducting a “meticulous transparency review” whose “very first tranche” will come out this fall, reflecting “the extensive review of hundreds of thousands of emails that will more specifically and systematically document exactly the kinds of nefarious activities that the GEC was involved in[,] in this unfortunate chapter of America’s history.”

Beattie wouldn’t say if that would be released through a vehicle like the Twitter Files, just that its approach would be “entirely appropriate and very satisfying as well.”

Keep reading

Environmental Groups Are Suing To Silence Scientists Who Wrote a Report Questioning Climate Change Alarmism

In July, the Energy Department released a report challenging many of the mainstream narratives surrounding climate change. The report, which was authored by the Climate Working Group (CWG)—a team of five climate scientists and economists—was drafted to “encourage a more thoughtful and science-based conversation about climate change and energy,” according to Energy Secretary Chris Wright. 

“To correct course, we need open, respectful, and informed debate. That’s why I’m inviting public comment on this report,” the energy secretary wrote in the report’s foreword. The publication has indeed opened up debate, garnering nearly 60,000 comments in the Federal Register. But it has also introduced a series of legal challenges against the agency and the CWG. 

On Thursday, the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts heard arguments in a lawsuit filed by two environmental groups—the Environmental Defense Fund and Union of Concerned Scientists—against the Energy Department, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the CWG. 

The lawsuit argues that when forming the CWG, Wright and the Energy Department violated the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), which requires federal advisory groups to provide meeting notices and meeting notes to the public, create an approved charter of the group’s mission, and “have a balanced membership in terms of ‘the points of view represented and the functions to be performed by the advisory committee,'” according to the the Congressional Research Service. 

Much of the lawsuit focuses on the viewpoint balance of the CWG, with the plaintiffs arguing that “all five authors are well known for holding ‘contrarian views on climate science that are out of step with the mainstream'” and “none of the members represents the consensus view among climate scientists that human activities…have unequivocally caused global warming.” To remedy the lawsuit, the environmental groups are demanding that the working group be disbanded, the report be vacated, and CWG members be prohibited from advising federal agencies until the defendants “comply with all requirements for the group to operate legally as an advisory committee.”

The Energy Department has refuted claims that it violated the FACA, arguing that the CWG is not an advisory group under the law because it was created to “exchange facts or information” with the Energy Department, not to “make recommendations on an identified governmental policy for which specified advice was being sought.” Additionally, the CWG was disbanded on September 3, in a letter sent from Wright to the group’s members, rendering “most of Plaintiffs’ claims…moot due to the CWG’s dissolution.” Even with the CWG officially being shut down, its members will continue to collaborate (outside of the federal government’s scope) and update the report, according to Bloomberg.

Keep reading

US lawmakers introduce ‘thought police’ bill to strip citizens of passports over Israel criticism

A US congressman is introducing a bill that could potentially be used to deny US citizens the right to travel based solely on their speech, including for criticism of Israel, the Intercept reported on 13 September.

Introduced by Florida Congressman Brian Mast, chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, the bill would grant Secretary of State Marco Rubio the power to revoke the passports of US citizens in the same way he has revoked the green cards and visas of foreign nationals in the US for criticizing Israel.

In March, Secretary of State Rubio revoked the visa of Turkish doctoral student Rumeysa Ozturk after she wrote an opinion piece critical of Israel in the Tufts University student newspaper in 2024. 

The op-ed did not mention Hamas, but called for boycotting and divesting from Israel.

One section of the bill grants the Secretary of State the ability to deny passports to people determined to have “knowingly aided, assisted, abetted, or otherwise provided material support to an organization the Secretary has designated as a foreign terrorist organization.”

The reference to “material support” disturbs civil liberties advocates because it is vague and can be interpreted to include speech and anti-war activism.

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL), which functions as a front for Israeli intelligence in the US, and the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law suggested in a letter last year that Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) was providing “material support” for Hamas by organizing campus protests against Israel’s genocide of Palestinians in Gaza.

The provision regarding material support to terrorism poses a threat specifically to journalists, The Intercept noted.

Keep reading

The Motive for Nepal’s Revolution

The final straw for the revolution in Nepal was the government’s attempt to stifle free speech by banning social media platforms. These events did not take place because a few kids had their tablets taken away. Extreme government corruption ran rampant for years while the elite lived luxurious lifestyles in spite of the people they ruled over. The Nepalese government attempted to prevent the people from freely voicing their growing discontent, and then, when the people attempted to protest, the government murdered over 20 school-aged children in cold blood.

The media has poorly portrayed the cause of events by calling it the “Gen Z” revolution, sparked by a social media ban, which is entirely misleading, as the culprit was corruption and poverty. One in four citizens lives below the poverty line, with the average Nepali earning $1,400 USD annually. The poorest 20% spend around 67% of their income on food, and, much like most nations, in 2025, the majority is struggling to maintain the cost of living.

Keep reading

“Art Must Always Tell The Truth”

Popular artist Banksy created a graffiti mural in London depicting the current state of the UK censorship system using the courts to trample the rights of British citizens…

As ‘sundance’ writes at TheConservativeTreeHouse.comit did not take long for the authorities to cover the mural and eventually attempt to remove it.

I particularly like the fact the govt turned the CCTV camera, so they can monitor who might visit the scene of the criminal dissent.

Apparently, the British government doesn’t quite see the irony.

Keep reading

Online Safety Act: Ofcom’s super-complaints scheme will be used to censor “emerging online harms”

Introduction

Ofcom is a public corporation accountable to the UK Parliament.  It is the UK’s regulator for communications services.  It regulates the UK’s broadband, home phone and mobile services, TV, radio and video on demand services, oversees the universal postal service and looks after the airwaves used by wireless devices such as cordless phones, walkie-talkies and even some car keys and doorbells.

With the introduction of the Online Safety Act (“the Act”) in 2023, Ofcom became the regulator for online safety.  The aim is that Ofcom will become the online regulator not only in the UK but globally.

The Act gives Ofcom the powers they need to take appropriate action against all companies in scope, no matter where they are based, where services have relevant links with the UK. This means services with a significant number of UK users or where UK users are a target market, as well as other services which have in-scope content that presents a risk of significant harm to people in the UK.Online Safety Act: explainer, Department for Science, Innovation & Technology, UK Government, 24 April 2025

What are Super-Complaints?

A super-complaint is a formal mechanism established under the Online Safety Act that allows designated organisations to raise concerns about systemic issues affecting users of regulated online services.  Unlike individual complaints, super-complaints focus on broad, emerging trends or widespread problems across multiple platforms, rather than isolated incidents. 

Eligible entities, such as consumer protection bodies or organisations representing users, can submit these complaints to trigger a specific regulatory response from Ofcom.  The super-complaints regime is designed to complement Ofcom’s own research and horizon scanning, a forward-looking assessment of emerging risks and trends in digital services.

“The super-complaints regime, in line with the Act and recent Government regulations … will enable eligible entities to raise systemic issues that arise across services or, in exceptional circumstances, on one service, to our attention. We expect to consult on draft guidance for potential super-complainants in September 2025 and publish our final guidance in early 2026,” Ofcom’s roadmap to regulation of “online safety” states.

From November 2023 to 11 January 2024, the Government ran a public consultation on the eligible entity criteria and procedure for super-complaints.  The Government’s response to the consultation was published on 9 June 2025; the Ministerial Foreword by Baroness Maggie Jones stated:

The objective of the super-complaints regime is to ensure that eligible entities can make complaints to Ofcom, as regulator, to make them aware of existing or emerging online harms. This will also support Ofcom’s horizon scanning function, supporting Ofcom in taking an agile approach to regulating online harms.

Once approved by both Houses of Parliament, the super-complaints regime will come into force on 31 December 2025.Ministerial Foreword, Consultation Outcome: Super-complaints eligible entity criteria and procedural requirements: government response, UK Government, 9 June 2025

Keep reading

No, South Park, You Didn’t Need to Yank the Charlie Kirk Episode

Oh, c’mon, South Park. You didn’t need to do that. This current season featured an episode about Charlie Kirk and his activism, which was pretty funny, and it’s been pulled from rotation. Amy has more: 

According to the New York Post, the episode was quietly pulled and the network did not issue a statement, noting that “industry insiders” said the episode was “temporarily pulled” from rotation on Comedy Central. It is still available on Paramount+ with a subscription. 

The current season has been a bit Trump heavy, but the program has gone after everybody for years, from the hypocrisy surrounding hate crime legislation to steroid use in sports, political correctness, global warming, and other political figures; the program has tormented everyone. Also, Kirk loved the portrayal. He had a sense of humor, and conservatives can take a joke. 

Keep reading

Von der Leyen Unveils New EU Censorship Push, Online Digital ID Plans, in 2025 State of the Union Speech

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen used her 2025 State of the Union speech to unveil a raft of new regulatory measures that introduce new challenges for digital rights and freedom of expression across the continent and the world.

Framed as measures for public health, democracy, and child protection, the Commission is pushing the EU deeper into institutionalized censorship and online regulation.

Addressing the European Parliament, von der Leyen declared she is “appalled by the disinformation that threatens global progress on everything from measles to polio.”

Citing fears of a global health crisis, she introduced a “Global Health Resilience Initiative,” which she said the EU would lead.

This initiative is expected to tie online speech more tightly to global health narratives, laying the groundwork for broader suppression of dissenting views under the label of medical misinformation.

Another centerpiece of her address was the so-called “European Democracy Shield,” a program that we’ve covered in great detail, intended to streamline and centralize the Commission’s censorship machinery under the banner of fighting “foreign information manipulation and interference.”

Framing the internet as a battlefield, she said: “Our democracy is under attack. The rise in information manipulation and disinformation is dividing our societies.”

Expanding on that framework, she announced the creation of a new institution, the European Centre for Democratic Resilience.

According to von der Leyen, this center will allow the EU to scale up its ability “to monitor and detect information manipulation and disinformation.”

But the agenda didn’t stop there. She introduced the Media Resilience Program, which she claimed would support “independent journalism and media literacy.”

In practice, however, such efforts often result in government-approved messaging being amplified, while dissenting outlets don’t get funded.

Von der Leyen pointed to declining local journalism in rural communities and claimed: “This has created many news deserts where disinformation thrives…This is why we will launch a new Media Resilience Program – it will support independent journalism and media literacy.”

Despite the existing Digital Services Act already mandating age verification (and therefore digital ID) online, von der Leyen floated a new, even more restrictive direction for internet access among young people.

Keep reading

Nepal’s PM quits and flees as his house is burned down by protesters who also chase finance minister through streets and attack him following outcry over social media ban

Nepal’s Prime Minister has resigned and fled after protesters burned down his house and chased his finance minister through the streets before attacking him, following public fury over a social media ban. 

Young Nepalis are leading angry protests across the country, with violence spreading in the capital and other cities. 

After enraged crowds torched KP Sharma Oli’s home, a new video footage has shown how Bishnu Prasad Paudel was pursued and set upon by a mob through the streets of Kathmandu.  

In the shocking clip, Paudel, 65, is seen sprinting down a road as dozens run after him. A protester coming from the other side leaps and kicks him, sending him crashing against a red wall.

The government official quickly gets up, stumbles, but starts running again before the video ends. Paudel, who doubles as the deputy prime minister of the country, has faced intense criticism since he began running Nepal’s economic affairs last year. 

Meanwhile, Oli, 73, stepped down a day after one of the bloodiest crackdowns in years left at least 19 dead. 

He had only begun his fourth term last year, following a coalition deal between his Communist Party and the centre-left Nepali Congress.

His departure came after three other ministers also resigned, even though the government had lifted the ban on social media. The country’s president, Ram Chandra Poudel, has now started the process of selecting a new leader. 

Keep reading

Censorship Concerns Surge As China Yanks Video Of Xi–Putin Organ Transplant Discussion

China’s state-owned broadcaster has rescinded international wire agency access to a hot mic video of Chinese and Russian leaders discussing longevity and organ transplants, an effort that shows the Chinese regime’s fear of attention on the topic, critics say.

The open mic exchange between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese leader Xi Jinping took place in Beijing on Sept. 3, as the two leaders walked together ahead of a military parade commemorating World War II.

Xi at the parade told Putin that “these days at 70 you are still a child,” prompting Putin to remark that continued organ transplants could allow one to live younger and even reach immortality. Xi in response said that it is predicted that there’s a chance of humans living to 150 years old.

The conversation became global news and sparked discussions about the Chinese regime’s state-sanctioned forced organ harvesting, a taboo topic in China. CCTV has since taken down the livestream video that captured the exchange and removed the moment from replays.

CCTV also sent a letter through its lawyer to Reuters—which licensed the video through CCTV and edited it into a four-minute clip—requesting the news agency to remove the footage on the grounds that the clips Reuters published exceeded the agreed-upon scope.

CCTV lawyer He Danning claimed Reuters’ “editorial treatment applied to this material has resulted in a clear misrepresentation of the facts and statements contained within the licensed feed.”

Reuters withdrew the video and issued a “kill” notice to its clients on Sept. 5. The agency said it had earlier distributed the clip to more than 1,000 media clients around the world, including major international news broadcasters and TV stations.

In a statement, Reuters said it was removing the content because it no longer has the legal permission to publish this copyrighted material.

“We stand by the accuracy of what we published. We have carefully reviewed the published footage, and we have found no reason to believe Reuters longstanding commitment to accurate, unbiased journalism has been compromised,” Reuters stated.

According to the London-based China Tribunal, forced organ harvesting has taken place in China for years “on a significant scale,” and practitioners of the Falun Gong spiritual group are the primary victims. It said that persecuted religious minorities including Uyghurs are also potential targets. Since 1999, millions of Falun Gong practitioners have been incarcerated in prisons, labor camps, and other facilities, with hundreds of thousands tortured and untold numbers persecuted to death, according to the Falun Dafa Information Center.

Keep reading