Tag: mass surveillance

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

Facial, Fingerprint, & Iris Scans: WEF/Bill Gates’ Vision For Biometric Digital Wallet Quietly Gaining Momentum

The push for a tightly controlled payment and identity system took a quiet but alarming step forward with a little-noticed deal between credit card giant Visa and an obscure tech firm called TECH5. Their seven-year agreement aims to fast-track digital identity and payment systems under the deceptively tame “Digital Public Infrastructure” (DPI), Biometric Update reports.

The troubling partnership, signed last week in Dubai, merges Visa’s massive financial network with TECH5’s invasive biometric tech, which includes facial, fingerprint, and iris scans, setting the stage for a surveillance-friendly future, all packaged as “convenience.” The goal? Integrated platforms to store your verified credentials for so-called seamless access to services and transactions. The companies claim these systems will adapt to “local laws and markets,” but that’s a thin promise when privacy protections often lag. The “identity wallets” they’re touting? They’re not just for verifying who you are, but they will have payment features built in, powered by Visa’s global payment infrastructure and TECH5’s AI-driven biometric tools.

If you weren’t already uneasy, Reclaim The Net has previously reported on how the usual globalist cheerleaders are all-in on digital identities for financial transactions:

The initiative, formalized in Dubai, supports a vision promoted by organizations including the United Nations, the European Union, the World Economic Forum, and Bill Gates. DPI strategies are being pushed as part of a global roadmap to digitize identity and financial access by 2030.

…

The move reflects a broader international push to integrate verified digital identity with financial services. This is often presented as a way to reduce friction in service delivery, expand inclusion, and prevent fraud. However, privacy advocates continue to raise alarms over the implications of centralizing both identification and payment systems.

Unsurprisingly, Visa’s leadership tried to soften the blow to civil liberties and privacy concerns.

“At Visa, we believe that secure, inclusive, and scalable digital identity is foundational to the future of payments,” said Dr. Svyatoslav Senyuta, Head of Visa Government Solutions in the CEMEA region.

“Our partnership with Tech5 reflects our commitment to advancing Digital Public Infrastructure globally. By combining Tech5’s biometric and identity innovations with Visa’s trusted payment technologies, we aim to empower governments and institutions to drive financial inclusion and digital trust at scale.”

Keep reading

Bipartisan Push in Congress to Weaken Section 230, Expand Online Surveillance, and Increase Platform Liability

During this week’s testimony before both chambers of Congress, FBI Director Kash Patel and several lawmakers made a concerted push to weaken protections for online platforms, advance surveillance partnerships, and promote government intervention in digital speech spaces.

The hearings revealed a rare bipartisan consensus around dismantling Section 230 and tightening control over how people interact and communicate online.

In the Senate, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham opened his questioning by linking online platforms to the assassination of Charlie Kirk, then repeatedly pressed Patel on whether the internet was a breeding ground for radicalization and crime.

Throughout their exchange, Graham blurred the lines between criminal behavior, such as grooming or inciting violence, and broad categories like bullying.

“Is there any law that can shut down one of these sites? For bullying children or allowing sexual predators on the site,” Graham asked.

He repeatedly implied that websites hosting objectionable content should be held legally responsible, asking, “Would you advocate a sunsetting of Section 230 to bring more liability to the companies who send this stuff out?”

Patel replied, “I’ve advocated for that for years.”

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act is a legal provision that protects online platforms from being held liable for content posted by their users.

Keep reading

California Bills on Social Media and AI Chatbots Fuel Privacy Fears

Two controversial tech-related bills have cleared the California legislature and now await decisions from Governor Gavin Newsom, setting the stage for a potentially significant change in how social media and AI chatbot platforms interact with their users.

Both proposals raise red flags among privacy advocates who warn they could normalize government-driven oversight of digital spaces.

The first, Assembly Bill 56, would require social media companies to display persistent mental health warnings to minors using their platforms.

Drawing from a 2023 US Surgeon General report, the legislation mandates that platforms such as Instagram, TikTok, and Snapchat show black-box warning labels about potential harm to youth mental health.

The alert would appear for ten seconds at login, again after three hours of use, and once every hour after that.

Supporters, including Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan and Attorney General Rob Bonta, claim the bill is necessary to respond to what they describe as a youth mental health emergency.

Critics of the bill argue it inserts state messaging into private platforms in a way that undermines user autonomy and treats teens as passive recipients of technology, rather than individuals capable of making informed choices.

Newsom has until October 13 to sign or veto the measure.

Keep reading

What Is ICE Doing With This Israeli Spyware Firm?

The deployment of Paragon’s Graphite spyware was a major scandal in Italy. Earlier this year, the messaging app WhatsApp revealed that 90 journalists and civil society figures had been targeted by the military-grade surveillance tech, which gives “total access” to a victim’s messages. The Italian government admitted to spying on refugee rights activists, and Paragon cancelled its contract with the government almost immediately after the story broke.

Now the same software may be coming to America—and again with an immigration focus. Last week, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security quietly lifted a stop-work order on a $2 million contract that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had with Paragon for a “fully configured proprietary solution including license, hardware, warranty, maintenance, and training.”

The deal was first signed by the Biden administration, and it was frozen in October 2024, less than a week after Wired broke the news of the contract. An administration official later insisted to Wired that, rather than reacting to bad publicity, they were reviewing the contract to comply with President Joe Biden’s order to ensure that commercial spyware use by the U.S. government “does not undermine democracy, civil rights and civil liberties.”

The details of that review—or even the contract itself—were never publicly disclosed. But the results are clear: ICE now has a green light to use whatever software Paragon was offering. (Neither Paragon nor ICE responded to requests for comment from The Guardian.)

The Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto, dedicated to researching electronic surveillance, found that Graphite targeted users through a “zero-click exploit.” By adding someone to a WhatsApp group in a certain way, Graphite can force their phones to read an infected PDF file without the user’s input. In other words, a cyberattack can be disguised as a spam text—and works even if victims ignore it.

After discovering the vulnerability with the Citizen Lab’s help, WhatsApp said in a statement that it was “constantly working to stay ahead of threats” and “build new layers of protection into WhatsApp.”

Paragon was co-founded by Ehud Barak, a former Israeli prime minister and general in charge of military intelligence, and Ehud Schneorson, a former head of Unit 8200, the Israeli equivalent of the National Security Agency. Last year, an American private equity firm bought Paragon for $500 million with the intention of merging it into RED Lattice, a firm connected to former U.S. intelligence officials. Paragon has positioned itself as a more ethical alternative to NSO Group, a spyware company similarly run by Unit 8200 veterans.

In 2021, NSO Group suffered a series of scandals after it was revealed that its Pegasus spyware was sold to police states around the world and was possibly used to spy on journalists who were murdered. NSO Group accused the media of running a “vicious and slanderous campaign” and promised to “thoroughly investigate any credible proof of misuse.” The Biden administration hit NSO Group with economic sanctions in response.

Around the time that the Pegasus scandal was breaking, a Paragon executive boasted to Forbes that their company would only deal with customers who “abide by international norms and respect fundamental rights and freedoms.”

Keep reading

The Freedoms Lost Under the Patriot Act

The Patriot Act was drafted and pushed through with lightning speed, something that could not have been written overnight. This was the beginning of warrantless surveillance, indefinite detention, and a wholesale reversal of constitutional rights. I have said many times: governments do not waste a good crisis. They wait for the right moment to impose measures that would never pass during normal times. Americans may be unaware of the freedoms that have been stripped away from them after October 26, 2001, when the Patriot Act was signed into law.

The Patriot Act, officially titled “the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001,” provided the government with unlimited surveillance powers. Terrorism became the premise to bypass the checks and balances of the legal system. Need a warrant? One could be obtained in any district or area where terrorism was suspected. Of course, warrantless searches were permitted under the guise of terrorism and deemed “sneak and peek” searches, where the government could enter a business or personal residence immediately and without warning to conduct an investigation.

Neither party has repealed the Patriot Act, and politicians on both sides of the aisle will NEVER relinquish these powers. The Patriot Act destroyed the Fourth Amendment and legally permitted the NSA to spy on all Americans. October 26, 2001, marked the day that the United States of America officially became a surveillance state. We The People were branded as potential terrorists, and “the land of the free” was permanently placed under the watchful eye of government. “The War on Terror” has no clear end or defined enemy. The real target was always domestic — the American people themselves. By creating an atmosphere of fear, Washington justified trillions in spending, the invasion of foreign countries, and the slow strangulation of the very liberties the terrorists supposedly hated.

Keep reading

Cybersecurity Experts Warn EU Against Chat Control 2.0 Regulation Ahead of Key Votes

A group of more than 500 experts in cybersecurity, cryptography, and computer science from 34 countries has issued a clear warning against the European Union’s proposed Chat Control 2.0 regulation.

In a joint open letter, the signatories describe the plan as “technically infeasible” and caution that it would open the door to “unprecedented capabilities for surveillance, control, and censorship.”

We obtained a copy of the open letter for you here.

Their statement arrives just days ahead of a critical European Council meeting on September 12, with a final vote set for October 14 that will determine whether the regulation moves forward.

The proposed law would compel messaging apps, email platforms, cloud services, and even providers of end-to-end encrypted communication to scan all user content automatically. This would apply to texts, images, and videos, whether or not there is any suspicion of wrongdoing.

According to the researchers, such detection systems cannot coexist with secure communication. “On‑device detection, regardless of its technical implementation, inherently undermines the protections that end‑to‑end encryption is designed to guarantee.”

By forcing companies to monitor encrypted content, the regulation would introduce security weaknesses that could be exploited by malicious actors and hostile governments.

The scientists also emphasize the inaccuracy of the proposed approach. They argue that large-scale scanning systems produce unacceptable error rates and could generate enormous numbers of false reports.

Keep reading