Tag: mass surveillance

As Mass Chat Surveillance Nears Approval, President von der Leyen is Accused of Transparency Violations Over Deleted Messages

As EU lawmakers push ahead with Chat Control 2.0, a proposal that would compel messaging platforms to scan private conversations, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is once again being called out for sidestepping the very transparency rules meant to keep officials accountable.

The contrast is hard to ignore: while European citizens face the prospect of mass surveillance, von der Leyen continues to ignore the laws and conduct her own communications away from public view.

The latest case involves a message sent by French President Emmanuel Macron in early 2024, during a politically sensitive phase of trade negotiations with Mercosur.

Macron’s message, sent via Signal, reportedly voiced serious reservations about the deal.

When a journalist requested access under EU transparency laws, the Commission first ignored the request for over a year. It then claimed the message could not be retrieved, citing Signal’s disappearing messages setting, which automatically deletes texts after a set time.

This justification has prompted the European Ombudswoman, Teresa Anjinho, to launch a formal inquiry. Her office has requested documentation outlining the Commission’s policies on mobile messaging and message retention, and plans to meet with officials to clarify how the request was handled.

This isn’t the first time von der Leyen’s messaging habits have raised concerns. In the case known as “Pfizergate,” she was criticized for failing to preserve texts exchanged with Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla during Covid vaccine negotiations.

The Commission refused to release the messages, and it later emerged they had been deleted. The New York Times took the matter to court and won, with the European General Court ruling that the Commission had wrongly withheld information of public interest.

Despite these past controversies, little appears to have changed. The Commission claims that messages like Macron’s had no administrative or legal impact and therefore didn’t need to be archived.

Officials have also pointed to concerns over phone storage and security as reasons for using auto-deleting features. These arguments seem increasingly weak in 2025, especially when applied to discussions between heads of state.

The journalist behind the Macron request argues that such deletion practices make it nearly impossible to monitor how decisions are made at the highest level.

Keep reading

New CBS owner David Ellison met with top Israeli general in scheme to spy on Americans

Israel’s former top general sought donations from David Ellison and his father, Larry, as part of a billionaire coterie to fund digital paramilitaries aimed at sabotaging pro-Palestine activists. The leaked documents show one planner explaining, “In the jungle, we need more guerrillas and less IDF.”

With Paramount and CBS News now under his control, the younger Ellison has installed self-described “Zionist fanatic” Bari Weiss as editor-in-chief.

The new owner of Paramount, David Ellison, participated in an Israeli government-led plot to surveil and suppress pro-Palestine activists in the US, leaked emails show. Originally dubbed “12 Tribes,” a reference to the dozen Jewish billionaires solicited to underwrite the operation, the scheme sought out American faces to fund surveillance firms run by Israeli intelligence veterans on behalf of Tel Aviv, as it targeted American citizens participating in the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement. 

The emails documenting the foreign influence campaign to counter BDS were first identified by journalist Jack Poulson, who discovered them in a trove leaked by the Handala hacking collective in 2024. The files show former Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz was tasked with recruiting wealthy Westerners to fund surveillance firms operated by Israeli intelligence veterans as they stalked and harassed people whom the government of Israel suspected of harboring pro-Palestinian sympathies.

In the emails, Hollywood talent agency executive Adam Berkowitz identified Ellison as “very interested” in “helping out with [undermining] the BDS movement.” Berkowitz introduced Ellison to the Israeli general in a group email: “Benny meet david. David meet Benny,” Berkowitz wrote on December 23, 2015, explaining that he “told david briefly about your [Gantz’s] 12 tribe idea which you can expound on to him which he seemed very interested in.”

Two days later, Ellison replied, “Mr Gantz it is a pleasure to meet you over e-mail. I very much look forward to discussing everything you are working on, and in the mean time hope you are enjoying the holiday season.” He added, “I will be back in LA on January 3rd and look forward to connecting in the New Year.”

A planning spreadsheet names other Zionist billionaires sought for the Israeli effort. They included David’s father, Oracle founder and Friends of the IDF board member Larry Ellison; Israeli-American billionaire and top Democratic Party sugar daddy Haim Saban; and Google founder Sergey Brin, whose “Israel-support” was still “tbd.” One of those named, Canadian bookchain owner Heather Reissman, had “already agreed” to donate.

Keep reading

X Urges EU to Reject “Chat Control 2.0” Surveillance Law Threatening End-to-End Encryption

X is urging European governments to reject a major surveillance proposal that the company warns would strip EU citizens of core privacy rights.

In a public statement ahead of a key Council vote scheduled for October 14, the platform called on member states to “vigorously oppose measures to normalize surveillance of its citizens,” condemning the proposed regulation as a direct threat to end-to-end encryption and private communication.

The draft legislation, widely referred to as “Chat Control 2.0,” would require providers of messaging and cloud services to scan users’ content, including messages, photos, and links, for signs of child sexual abuse material (CSAM).

Central to the proposal is “client-side scanning” (CSS), a method that inspects content directly on a user’s device before it is encrypted.

X stated plainly that it cannot support any policy that would force the creation of “de facto backdoors for government snooping,” even as it reaffirmed its longstanding commitment to fighting child exploitation.

The company has invested heavily in detection and removal systems, but draws a clear line at measures that dismantle secure encryption for everyone.

Privacy experts, researchers, and technologists across Europe have echoed these warnings.

By mandating that scans occur before encryption is applied, the regulation would effectively neutralize end-to-end encryption, opening private conversations to potential access not only by providers but also by governments and malicious third parties.

The implications reach far beyond targeted investigations. Once CSS is implemented, any digital platform subject to the regulation would be forced to scrutinize every message and file sent by its users.

This approach could also override legal protections enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, specifically Articles 7 and 8, which safeguard privacy and the protection of personal data.

A coalition of scientists issued a public letter warning that detection tools of this kind are technically flawed and unreliable at scale.

High error rates could lead to false accusations against innocent users, while actual abuse material could evade detection.

Keep reading

Swiss Voters Adopt Digital-ID Scheme

In a nationwide referendum on Sunday, Swiss voters narrowly adopted a digital-ID proposal put forth by the nation’s federal government.

The proposal, formally titled the “Federal Act on Electronic Proof of Identity and Other Electronic Evidence (E-ID Act, BGEID),” passed with 50.39 percent of the popular vote. Notably, a majority of cantons (the Swiss equivalent to states in the United States) voted against the proposal (15.5 against, versus 7.5 in favor, including half cantons). Since the referendum did not involve a constitutional amendment, however, the proposal did not require a majority of cantons to pass.

The now-approved measure creates a government-managed digital-identification system. Under its provisions, users’ data will be stored on their smartphones and used only for identity verification (as opposed to broader purposes), and requires only the minimum information to be revealed to a third party (e.g., when purchasing alcohol at a store). The digital ID is optional; Swiss citizens may continue to use the county’s existing national ID card.

Second Attempt

Sunday’s referendum was the federal government’s second attempt at implementing a digital-ID system. Voters rejected a previous proposal in March 2021, with 64.4 percent voting against it, mainly due to concerns about users’ data falling in the hands of private companies, which would have managed the originally proposed program.

Although the Swiss Federal Assembly (parliament) modified its second proposal to address those concerns, any digital ID poses a fundamental threat to individual freedom and privacy, and would massively increase government’s ability to track citizens’ every movement. Furthermore, digital IDs are part of the United Nations’ totalitarian Agenda 2030 plan to impose central planning on a global scale, and the UN and Bill Gates are working to implement a “digital public infrastructure.”

Additionally, conservative groups opposed to the measure argued that a digital ID would eventually become mandatory, and that any system still risked handing over citizens’ data to large companies and being used for purposes beyond simple identity verification.

Unexpected Opposition

Despite the measure passing, Sunday’s referendum result was significantly narrower than expected. The proposal passed the Federal Assembly by wide margins — 170-25 in the National Council (lower house) and 43-1 in the Council of States (upper house) — with only members of the conservative Swiss People’s Party and two minor affiliated parties objecting.

Although opponents gathered enough signatures to force a referendum on the legislation, polling suggested that nearly three-fifths of voters would support it. Ultimately, the measure barely passed, and was rejected by majorities in most cantons.

Swiss media and analysts saw the narrow passage as resulting from high turnout by conservative opponents of the measure. Swiss public broadcaster Schweizer Radio und Fernsehen analyzed that the result “should give the Federal Council and the parliamentary majority pause for thought,” and “is not a good sign for other digitization projects in Switzerland.”

Dangers of Democracy

Sunday’s referendum illustrates the dangers of democracy, specifically of the majority imposing its will on the minority, even if it infringes on the latter’s individual freedom. Although opposition to a digital ID was widespread — voters in a majority of cantons opposed the concept — this potentially far-reaching policy became law with only a 50.4-percent popular majority.

Switzerland, whose current system incorporates direct democracy, holds nationwide referendums up to four times a year. Despite now being accepted as foundational to the Swiss political system, nationwide referendums were virtually nonexistent before the 1870s, more than 20 years after Switzerland became a federal state. Notably, once Switzerland adopted federal direct democracy, it quickly inspired multiple U.S. states to do the same in the form of “citizens’ initiatives.”

The U.S. Founding Fathers recognized the dangers of democracy, and instead created the U.S. federal government as a constitutional republic. For example, James Madison wrote in The Federalist, No. 10, “Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.”

The word “democracy” is nowhere to be found in the Declaration of Independence or Constitution — and this is intentional. In contrast, Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution requires each state to have “a Republican Form of Government.”

Keep reading

“Smart Dust Is Already Everywhere”: Microscopic Spy Sensors Track Your Location While Tech Companies Hide The Surveillance Revolution Forever

The concept of “smart dust” might sound like something from a science fiction tale, but it’s gradually becoming an integral part of modern technology. Originating as a theoretical proposal for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), smart dust has evolved into a promising tool for various industries. From environmental monitoring to intelligence gathering, these microscopic sensors offer a wide range of applications. As they continue to develop, the potential to revolutionize data collection and interaction with our environments becomes increasingly apparent. This article delves into the origins, current developments, and future implications of smart dust technology.

The Science Fiction Origins of Smart Dust

The idea of smart dust can trace its roots back to a 1963 science fiction story by Polish writer Stanisław Lem. In “The Invincible,” Lem envisioned a world where tiny, autonomous nanobots roamed the atmosphere of a distant planet. These microscopic entities, although individually weak, could form powerful swarms capable of complex behaviors. While the story’s bots operated through basic instincts, the narrative explored the tension between human intelligence and automaton logic. Lem’s narrative serves as a fascinating precursor to the smart dust technology we see today, highlighting the thin line between fiction and scientific innovation.

While Lem’s nanobots were purely fictional, they set the stage for real-world technological advancements. In the decades following Lem’s story, researchers began exploring the potential of creating tiny, wireless sensors capable of collecting and transmitting data. These early efforts laid the groundwork for what we now call smart dust. Initially conceptualized as a military technology, smart dust was meant to gather intelligence in a discreet and efficient manner. Over time, its potential applications have expanded dramatically.

From Concept to Reality: The Evolution of Smart Dust

Smart dust technology has come a long way since its inception. What started as a theoretical concept has become a tangible tool for data collection and environmental monitoring. Early prototypes, like the “MICA” platform developed by Crossbow Technology, Inc. and the “Spec” sensors from UC Berkeley, demonstrated the feasibility of creating tiny sensors capable of measuring environmental variables. These devices, measuring only a few millimeters, could record changes in humidity, light, and temperature, providing valuable data for various scientific and industrial applications.

In recent years, the capabilities of smart dust have expanded significantly. Advances in microengineering have enabled the development of sensors that are nearly invisible to the naked eye, with some measuring as small as 0.02 cubic millimeters. These tiny devices can now detect sound and are being adapted to analyze the chemical composition of the air. The ability to deploy these sensors in swarms offers the potential for comprehensive environmental monitoring and data collection on an unprecedented scale.

Keep reading

First the U.K., Next the U.S.? Britain’s Digital ID Plan Should Scare Americans.

The U.K. may be about to get even more dystopian. Prime Minister Keir Starmer proposed a plan last week that would require every adult in the United Kingdom to have a digital ID in order to work in the country, with these IDs becoming mandatory by 2029. Employers would be required to consult an app-based system containing a person’s name, photo, birth date, nationality, and residency status, rather than check physical IDs or National Insurance numbers (the U.K.’s version of a Social Security number) before hiring.

“The proposals are the government’s latest bid to tackle illegal immigration, with the new ID being a form of proof of a citizen’s right to live and work in the UK,” reports Sky News. “The so-called ‘Brit card’ will be subject to a consultation and would require legislation to be passed, before being rolled out.”

In the U.K. and the U.S., authorities already employ an array of government-issued identification mechanisms—passports, physical driver’s licenses, Social Security or National Insurance numbers. So how different could a digital ID be?

Very different, say civil libertarians, privacy experts, and cybersecurity gurus.

Keep reading

Denmark Accused of Spreading False Claims to Push EU’s Mass Surveillance Law

A growing confrontation over major digital surveillance powers is unfolding within the European Union, as Denmark’s Justice Minister Peter Hummelgaard stands accused of using false claims to pressure hesitant governments into backing the European Commission’s proposed Chat Control 2.0 regulation.

In a press release, digital rights campaigner and former Member of the European Parliament Patrick Breyer has denounced what he describes as a manufactured crisis aimed at forcing through legislation that would subject all private communications in the EU to automated scanning.

Classified minutes obtained by Netzpolitik from a September 15 Council meeting reveal that Hummelgaard, currently presiding over the EU Council, told interior ministers that the European Parliament would block any renewal of the existing voluntary scanning framework unless governments agreed to adopt the new regulation.

Breyer immediately pushed back on this claim.

“This is a blatant lie designed to manufacture a crisis,” said Breyer.

“There is no such decision by the European Parliament…We are witnessing a shameless disinformation campaign to force an unprecedented mass scanning law upon 450 million Europeans. I call on EU governments, and particularly the German government, not to fall for this blatant manipulation. To sacrifice the fundamental right to digital privacy and secure encryption based on a fabrication would be a catastrophic failure of political and moral leadership.”

The regulation in question, officially called the Child Sexual Abuse Regulation (CSAR), would compel messaging platforms, email providers, and cloud storage services to scan all user content for potential child abuse material.

This would apply even to services using end-to-end encryption, meaning private conversations on platforms like WhatsApp, Signal, and iMessage would no longer be truly confidential.

Although supporters describe the system as targeted and limited, the legal framework allows broad application.

Keep reading

Digital ID UK: Starmer’s Expanding Surveillance State

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer came into office promising competence and calm after years of alleged political chaos.

What has followed is a government that treats civil liberties as disposable.

Under his watch, police have leaned on broad public order powers to detain people over “offensive” tweets.

Critics argue that what counts as “offensive” now changes depending on the political mood, which means ordinary citizens find themselves guessing at what might trigger a knock on the door.

This is happening while mass facial recognition cameras are being installed in public places.

The pattern is clear: expand surveillance, narrow dissent, and then assure the public it is all in the name of safety and order.

Against that backdrop, a digital ID system looks less like modernization and more like the missing piece in an expanding control grid.

Once every adult is forced to plug into a centralized identity wallet to work, rent, or access services, the state’s ability to monitor and sanction becomes unprecedented.

Starmer’s Labour government is dusting off one of its oldest obsessions: the dream of tagging every citizen like a parcel at the post office.

The latest revival comes in the form of a proposal to create mandatory digital ID cards, already nicknamed the “Brit Card,” for every working adult in the country.

Keep reading

American travelers to Europe will be forced to hand over biodata before flights starting next month

Americans flying to Europe will need to be fingerprinted under new EU regulations being brought in next month. 

From October 12, US citizens will have to go through the EU’s Entry and Exit System to enter 29 countries, including France, Germany, Italy and Spain. 

Under the new system, passport control agents will take fingerprints, a facial image and passport details. 

It will be introduced gradually over six months, according to advice from the US Department of State website, which also includes the full list of countries impacted.  

The new digital border program is likely to prompt longer wait times at security on entry to the EU countries as travelers have to register upon their first entry to the impacted zone, known as the Schengen Area. 

American passengers will pass through e-gates and a computerized system which will automatically check passports on entry to the 29 countries within this zone. 

However, once a traveler is within the borders of the Schengen Area, they are free to travel between the 29 countries with minimal security checks. 

The zone includes 25 EU member states, and four non-EU member states – Switzerland, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. 

Keep reading

A Weakened United Nations Plans Medical Censorship and Surveillance

The United Nations is going into its 80th annual conference as an organization in decline. Nevertheless, this week, world leaders will meet in New York to discuss how they can exploit the world’s problems for their globalist ends.

Under the guise of reducing disease, combating mental illness, and dealing with the next pandemic, the UN plans to use its waning power to surveil and censor people.

Since its creation, the UN has sought to exploit legitimate societal threats and problems for their ultimate goal, installing a world government. They don’t hide their true intentions. UN Secretary-General António Guterres said last year during his speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos that the “only way” to address the world’s needs is through “strong multilateral institutions and frameworks and effective mechanisms of global governance.”

In 2015, just after the UN revealed its Agenda 2030 plan, UN Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs Wu Hongbo cited a long list of problems that only “global governance” can solve. It’s quite the speech. To soothe concerns of so much power in the hands of so few, he even claimed the UN is just, fair, and transparent. “We need a global governance that encompasses a much broader range of development facets and provides long-term solutions for them,” Wu said, adding that “the United Nations can become a locus for such global governance.”

And back in 1962, Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member, Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor, and former State Department official Lincoln P. Bloomfield wrote a report for the U.S. State Department in which he said:

A world effectively controlled by the United Nations is one in which “world government” would come about through the establishment of supranational institutions, characterized by mandatory universal membership.

Exploiting Health Concerns

A draft laying out one of the discussions happening this week indicates the globalists seek more control over how nations respond to disease, mental illness, and the next health “crisis.” In the “political declaration,” they claim they want to reduce death from noncommunicable diseases by 30 percent, make treatment for hypertension and mental illness more accessible, and reduce smoking, all supposedly part of a larger goal to reduce poverty and inequality.

The way they intend to accomplish these goals is by bringing “together governments, civil society and the private sector” — also known as public-private partnerships. That includes funding and empowering the UN’s public health arm, the World Health Organization (WHO). They also plan to “enact within national and, where relevant, regional contexts legislation and regulation.” And they want to develop and implement “multisectoral national plans and, where appropriate, subnational plans.” This is all just a fancy way of saying they want control over sovereign nations’ governments.

The declaration says that accomplishing all this will require censorship and surveillance. The censorship is euphemistically defended as necessary to “counter misinformation and disinformation around the prevention and treatment of noncommunicable diseases and mental health conditions.”

It also mentions their intent to “regulate digital environments.”

Keep reading