Tag: eu

Inside the Brussels Showdown Over Europe’s Speech Police

On a mild Brussels morning, inside the halls of the European Parliament, a group of politicians, legal scholars, and policy skeptics gathered to talk about a piece of legislation most Europeans haven’t read, but which may soon be quietly reshaping how they speak, share, and think online.

Yesterday’s event, hosted by MEPs Stephen Bartulica and Virginie Joron, with support from ADF International, focused on the increasingly controversial Digital Services Act (DSA), a law initially sold as a digital shield against misinformation and tech giant abuse, but which critics now say has evolved into something more aggressive.

The conference title “The Digital Services Act and Threats to Freedom of Expression” tells you everything you need to know about the mood in the room.

Virginie Joron, a French MEP, opened the event with a direct shot at what she sees as the DSA’s unspoken evolution. “What was sold as the Digital Services Act is increasingly functioning as a Digital Surveillance Act,” she said. Her argument: a law intended to protect rights is now being used by institutions to regulate dissent on platforms like Facebook, Telegram, and X.

Many have previously tried to dismiss this as anti-Brussels paranoia. But even the US State Department’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, & Labour has flagged the DSA’s “chilling implications” for open debate in Europe.

The devil, as always, lives in the definitions. Who decides what’s “disinformation”? What counts as “hate speech”? How far can governments go in flagging and removing content that someone, somewhere, considers problematic?

Paul Coleman, the Executive Director of ADF International, doesn’t seem particularly reassured by the current answers. “Free speech is again under threat on this continent in a way it hasn’t been since the nightmare of Europe’s authoritarian regimes just a few decades ago,” he told the room.

Keep reading

European Commission Accused of Orchestrating $735M Speech-Control Campaign

A new report has uncovered an expansive and quietly orchestrated campaign by the European Commission to shape public discourse through nearly €649 ($735M) million in taxpayer-funded projects aimed at regulating online speech.

Titled Manufacturing Misinformation: The EU-Funded Propaganda War Against Free Speech, the document was released by the think tank MCC Brussels and authored by Dr. Norman Lewis, a seasoned analyst of digital communication and regulatory policy.

Behind the EU’s frequent calls to combat “hate speech” and “disinformation” lies what the report describes as a vast ideological infrastructure designed to erode free expression under the guise of safety and civic empowerment.

The Commission, the report states, “has funded hundreds of unaccountable non-governmental organizations and universities to carry out 349 projects related to countering ‘hate speech’ and ‘disinformation’ to the tune of almost €650 million.”

That staggering figure surpasses what Brussels spends on transnational cancer research by over 30%, a discrepancy the report calls deliberate: “The EU Commission regards stemming the cancer of free speech as more of a priority than the estimated 4.5 million new cancer cases and almost two million cancer deaths in Europe in 2022, for example.”

While EU officials present these programs as public-interest research, the report argues they constitute a form of “soft authoritarianism,” enshrining speech codes and narrowing acceptable opinion through bureaucratic manipulation. “This is a top-down, authoritarian, curated consensus,” it states, “where expression is free only when it speaks the language of compliance established by the Commission.”

Many of these initiatives feature a distinct use of vague and euphemistic terminology, part of what the report calls “NEUspeak;” a deliberate linguistic strategy designed to obscure intent and preempt scrutiny. The project acronyms alone, such as FAST LISA and VIGILANT, are described as a form of branding deceit.

Keep reading

JD Vance Warns EU Censorship and Fines Threaten US Free Speech and First Amendment Values

Vice President JD Vance sounded the alarm this week over the growing international push to restrict speech, warning that aggressive censorship trends in Europe could soon clash with American constitutional principles.

Speaking with Glenn Beck, Vance stressed that transatlantic influence runs deep, and the speech policies being advanced in Europe aren’t confined to their borders.

“The kind of social media censorship that we’ve seen in Western Europe, it will and in some ways, it already has made its way to the United States. That was the story of the Biden administration silencing people on social media,” Vance said.

He argued that the US must take a firm stance in defense of First Amendment ideals and not allow foreign pressures to shape domestic policies, particularly in the digital space. “So we’re going to be very protective of American interests when it comes to things like social media regulation. We want to promote free speech. We don’t want our European friends telling social media companies that they have to silence Christians or silence conservatives, and I think there is going to be that friction over the next ten years.”

While emphasizing that diplomatic ties remain intact, Vance acknowledged that serious ideological divisions are emerging. “It’s not that we are not friends, but there’re gonna have some disagreements you didn’t see 10 years ago.”

Vance’s concerns were prompted by a question from Beck regarding troubling developments in countries like Canada and within the EU. The digital censorship framework in Europe has gone well beyond theory, with major tech companies already feeling the brunt of regulatory threats. Firms like X, Instagram, Facebook, and TikTok have faced mounting pressure to fall in line with EU speech codes or suffer severe financial consequences.

The EU has been leveraging the weight of its Digital Services Act (DSA) to pressure American tech companies into stricter content moderation, effectively threatening massive financial penalties if platforms fail to comply with the bloc’s speech regulations.

Keep reading

US to Begin European Troop Withdrawal Talks, NATO Ambassador Says

In a move signaling a long-overdue shift in American foreign policy, the United States, under President Donald J. Trump, is preparing to open discussions with European allies on reducing its military footprint across the continent.

US Ambassador to NATO Matthew Whitaker confirmed the Trump administration’s plans during a security forum in Estonia, stating that the conversations will formally begin after June’s NATO summit in The Hague, Reuters reported.

“Nothing has been determined,” Whitaker said, “but as soon as we do, we are going to have these conversations in the structure of NATO.” He made it clear this isn’t just another round of diplomatic foot-dragging. “It’s more than 30 years of the US desire to reduce troops in Europe. President Trump just said, enough—this is going to happen, and it’s going to happen now.”

The remarks starkly contrast with previous administrations’ foreign policy, which treated NATO like a sacred cow regardless of how little European members contributed in return. Trump-era officials have increasingly called out what they see as chronic European underfunding and dependency.

US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth minced no words earlier this year, declaring that “stark strategic realities prevent the United States of America from being primarily focused on the security of Europe.”

In private discussions over the allegedly encrypted messaging app Signal, Hegseth reportedly expressed his “loathing of European free-loading,” a sentiment echoed by Vice President J.D. Vance. The two have become key voices pushing to restore a foreign policy rooted in American interests, not global entanglements.

Despite the uproar in some NATO capitals, Whitaker reassured allies that the US isn’t abandoning the alliance altogether—just recalibrating its role. “We’re going to remain in this alliance,” he said. “But we’re not going to have any more patience for foot-dragging.”

The numbers behind the move are substantial. America currently maintains an estimated 128,000 troops across Europe, with Germany hosting the lion’s share. Poland, Italy, and the UK also house significant contingents.

But the political winds are shifting, and rightly so. Poland’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk recently tried to tamp down fears after the US quietly redeployed forces away from a major Ukrainian support hub. Still, the writing’s on the wall.

For decades, Washington has carried the bulk of the military burden in Europe, funding and defending nations that often lecture Americans while failing to meet even basic NATO spending obligations. With ballooning domestic priorities and a border crisis back home, many Americans—especially those aligned with the nationalist, Trump-aligned right—are asking why their sons and daughters are still stationed abroad to defend countries that won’t defend themselves.

Critics of the withdrawal, unsurprisingly, warn of a “security gap” that Russia could exploit.

Keep reading

USAID: Hungary Claims U.S. and EU Gave over $63 Million to Anti-Orbán Media in Bid to Topple Government

The head of Budapest’s Office for the Protection of Sovereignty claimed that tens of millions of dollars from the United States and the European Union have funded left-leaning media institutions over the past three years, with the intent of overthrowing the conservative government of Viktor Orbán in Hungary.

Supposedly independent media outlets in Hungary have been propped up by money from the now-axed United States Agency for International Development (USAID), other State Department programmes, as well as from the European Commission, Tamás Lánczi said this week.

The top man at the Office for the Protection of Sovereignty said that the globalist influence schemes were intended fund “propaganda” in the hopes of toppling the government of Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, one of the leading opponents of the neo-liberal open borders and socially far-left agendas favoured by elites in Brussels and Washington.

According to Lánczi, the American government and the European Commission — the executive arm of the EU — gave over HUF 23 billion ($63.5 million) to media outlets, which he claimed were in fact political pressure groups, over the past three years, alone.

“It’s not micro-donations, it’s not reader support, it’s not a voluntary offering, it’s money from foreign powers… It’s not charity, it’s a HUF 23 billion foreign intervention. This money was used to buy media workers, activists and politicians,” he said per the Magyar Nemzet newspaper.

The watchdog said the majority of the funding came from the European Commission, accounting for HUF 19.5 billion ($54 million) of the total. However, Lánczi said that USAID — under the Biden administration — directed HUF 3.5 billion ($9.7 million) to fund anti-Orbán media.

Keep reading

EU nations seek mandatory social media age checks

France, Spain, and Greece are advocating for mandatory age verification on social media platforms such as Meta’s Facebook and Elon Musk’s X, Bloomberg reported on Friday.

The proposed rules would require all internet-connected devices to be equipped with age verification technology. Digital services ministers from the three EU member states are coordinating the initiative ahead of a meeting with their counterparts from the bloc on June 6, a document cited by Bloomberg said.

The three nations reportedly argue that the “lack of proper and widespread age-verification mechanisms” makes it difficult to effectively enforce age limits. They aim to leverage the economic power of the EU’s 450 million consumers to compel tech companies to implement robust verification systems, according to the report.

French President Emmanuel Macron confirmed on Tuesday his support for mandatory age verification for teenagers registering on social media platforms, stating that online networks have contributed to suffering and mental health issues among young people.

“We must protect our children,” he told TF1, adding that age verification on social networks should be imposed.

According to Bloomberg, the European Commission, along with several bloc members, is already developing pilot projects to boost parental controls and age verification. However, their efforts are being hindered by regulatory differences across EU countries and the ease with which users can access social networks from outside the bloc.

Keep reading

The EU plot to crush free speech in Ireland

The European Commission in Brussels threatened to bring legal proceedings against Ireland last week. The Commission is demanding Ireland impose draconian restrictions on the right of its people to speak their minds. Yes, you read that right: according to the EU, Ireland has too much free speech.

The problem, as the EU sees it, is ‘hate speech’. In 2008, the EU hammered out a ‘framework decision’ on xenophobia, which requires all member states to forbid incitement to violence or hatred on the basis of race, religion or nationality. It also criminalises Holocaust denial, or ‘trivialisation’ of the Holocaust and other crimes against humanity.

Ireland, however, has not complied with the 2008 diktat. It hardly needed to, since it has had hate-speech laws of its own since 1989, which nearly go as far as what Brussels is demanding anyway. These laws ban speech likely to stir up hatred on grounds of race, religion, sexual orientation or membership of the Traveller community. Last year, the Irish government even imposed a new law that increases the length of prison sentences for crimes that are proven to be motivated by ‘hatred’ on the basis of any of those characteristics.

Yet according to the EU, none of this is good enough. In a communiqué released on 7 May, the Commission gave Ireland two months to enact the EU’s provisions on incitement to violence and Holocaust denial. If Ireland fails to do this, it faces punitive fines and a date at the European Court of Justice.

This threat should worry anyone who cares about free speech and democracy. For one thing, the laws demanded by the EU are a frontal attack on vital aspects of free speech. Of course Holocaust denial is appallingly offensive. It’s also very stupid, since there is no respectable argument that the Holocaust didn’t happen. But criminalising it is not the answer. Offensiveness doesn’t justify dragging people through the courts for what they say.

Keep reading

Pfizergate: Top European Court Slams Corrupt Globalist EU Chief Von der Leyen in Bombshell Ruling Over Secret Covid-19 Vaccine Procurement Texts

In a ruling that’s shaken the corrupt foundations of the European Union, the EU’s top court has declared that Commission President Ursula von der Leyen broke transparency rules by hiding secret text messages she exchanged with Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla—just as the EU was locking itself into the biggest vaccine deal in its history.

The judgment, handed down by the European Court of Justice (ECJ), exposes a damning breach of public trust and fuels the growing outcry over what critics have dubbed “Pfizergate”—a scandal that underscores everything wrong with the unaccountable EU bureaucracy, Big Pharma’s grip on policy, and von der Leyen’s corrupt, authoritarian style of rule.

Keep reading

Hungarian PM Orbán: Ukraine’s EU Membership Would Mean War in Europe

Hungary is standing its ground as the European Union’s globalist ‘leaders’ push forward with plans to fast-track Ukraine’s membership.

Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, perhaps President Trump’s closest allies in Europe, and key figures in the Hungarian government have issued their clearest and most urgent warning yet: admitting a war-torn Ukraine into the EU isn’t just reckless—it’s a one-way ticket to economic ruin, societal upheaval, and potentially full-blown war on European soil.

Hungary’s position isn’t new, but the stakes have never been higher. Prime Minister Orbán told public radio last Friday that Ukraine’s accession would amount to “economic suicide” for Europe. Speaking bluntly, he said the EU’s liberal leadership—led by corrupt, unelected Brussels bureaucrats like Ursula von der Leyen—is hurtling toward a catastrophe without consulting the people of Europe.

“As a neighboring country, we believe that if Ukraine is admitted to the European Union, it will mean war,” Orbán declared earlier this week at a conference of EU parliamentary speakers in Budapest. He reminded attendees that the EU has never accepted a country at war—and for good reason.

Hungary rejects Brussels’ obsession with endless military aid, calling instead for peace and realism. “The longer the war lasts, the more lives will be lost,” Orbán emphasized.

The prime minister’s sentiment was echoed by Máté Kocsis, leader of the Fidesz faction in Hungary’s National Assembly. “This will be an irreversible decision,” he said, adding: “One that will shape the fate of Hungarians for the next 100 to 150 years.”

Kocsis made it clear that Ukraine, as a country without a functioning democratic process, cannot be a legitimate candidate. “The minimum condition for accession talks is a democratic election,” he said. That requires peace—not more war.

Keep reading

Eccentric Polish Presidential Candidate Sets EU Flag Alight; Says “Down With Eurocommunism”

Eurocrats were thrown into an uproar last week after Polish presidential candidate and European Parliament member Grzegorz Braun—known for his provocative theatrical stunts—set fire to the European Union flag, condemning what he called the EU’s ‘ideological occupation’ of Poland by a globalist elite.

Braun, a Polish ultranationalist known for his bombastic style and unapologetic, unfiltered rhetoric, carried out the act at the historic Wujek coal mine in Katowice—a symbolic site tied to Poland’s anti-communist resistance.

First, he stormed into the Ministry of Industry, tore down the EU flag, wiped his shoes on it, and then burned it outside the building. “This is Poland—down with Euro-Communism,” he proclaimed in the video posted to his social media accounts.

“This organization has led to Poland’s liquidation,” Braun declared, referring to the European Union. “We will not tolerate symbols from hostile structures. In Poland, we do not show the signs of enemy organizations. These emblems carry no legal protection here.”

The action was part of Braun’s EU critical, to put it lightly, campaign ahead of Poland’s upcoming presidential election. He’s positioning himself as the uncompromising defender of Polish sovereignty against what he sees as the EU’s overreach, particularly in energy and environmental policy, which he claims threatens the heart of Polish industry.

“This is Poland, not Brussels!” Braun shouted during the protest, as coal miners cheered him on in solidarity.

Braun’s presidential campaign has centered around opposing EU mandates, defending traditional Polish values, and fighting what he calls “globalist totalitarianism.”

Keep reading