Tag: mass surveillance

Meet Trump’s CDC Director: Susan Monarez

As the Trump administration has spent its first few months in The White House constructing the physical and digital infrastructure required for a pre-crime, technocratic police state, little attention has been paid to the ways in which the institutions ostensibly dedicated to “public health” are helping build out this digital control grid. As Unlimited Hangout has been reporting for many years now, in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, a prominent subgroup of the surveillance state has emerged at the intersection of Big Tech, Big Pharma and the military industrial complex — one that is laying the groundwork to implement the final frontier of mass surveillance: the bio-surveillance apparatus. 

During his first term, Trump implemented the notorious Operation Warp Speed, the Pentagon-ran COVID-19 response plan which issued emergency deregulatory measures and massive funding for the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. Now, his second administration has successfully managed to become associated with COVID-era dissidence. This was primarily accomplished through Trump successfully securing the endorsements of figures who were skeptical of the official line on COVID-19, most prominently comedian and podcaster Joe Rogan and longtime environmental litigator and founder of Children’s Health Defense, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Since taking office, however, the second Trump administration has consistently contradicted this unofficial commitment to the spirit of COVID-era dissent and public health institutional overhaul. Just last week, the President touted Operation Warp Speed as one of the “most incredible things ever done in this country.” The week before, he announced an initiative to enable the vast sharing of individuals’ health data across a myriad of “health systems and apps,” in partnership with Pentagon-contracting Big Tech companies. More quietly, however, Trump nominated a seasoned official of the biosecurity apparatus named Susan Monarez to be the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Monarez, whose background is perfectly in line with this technocratic approach to healthcare that the administration has embarked on, was “handpicked” by Kennedy after the previous nominee, Dave Weldon, withdrew his nomination in March. Monarez had been acting director of the CDC for several months and was confirmed at the end of July with little fanfare.

Keep reading

The New Normal Of US Domestic Spying

What if the federal government captures in real time the contents of every telephone call, email and text message and all the fiber-optic data generated by every person and entity in the United States 24/7? What if this mass surveillance was never authorized by any federal law and tramples the Fourth Amendment?

What if this mass surveillance has come about by the secret collusion of presidents and their spies in the National Security Agency and by the federal government forcing the major telephone and computer service providers to cooperate with it? What if the service providers were coerced into giving the feds continuous physical access to their computers and thus to all the data contained in and passing through those computers?

What if President George W. Bush told the NSA that since it is part of the Defense Department and he was the commander in chief of the military, NSA agents could spy on anyone, notwithstanding any court orders or statutes that prohibited it? What if Bush believed that his orders to the military were not constrained by the laws against computer hacking that Congress had written or the interpretations of those laws by federal courts or even by the Constitution?

What if Congress has written laws that all presidents have sworn to uphold and that require a warrant issued by a judge before the NSA can spy on anyone but Bush effectively told the NSA to go through the motions of getting a warrant while spying without warrants on everyone in the U.S. all the time? What if Presidents Barack Obama, Joe Biden and Donald Trump have taken the same position toward the NSA and ordered or permitted the same warrantless and lawless spying?

What if the Constitution requires warrants based on probable cause of criminal behavior before surveillance can be conducted but Congress has written laws reducing that standard to probable cause of communicating with a foreign national? What if a basic principle of constitutional law is that Congress is subject to the Constitution and therefore cannot change its terms or their meanings?

What if the Constitution requires that all warrants particularly describe the place to be searched or the person or thing to be seized? What if the warrants Congress permits the NSA to use violate that requirement by permitting a federal court — the FISA Court — to issue general warrants? What if general warrants do not particularly describe the place to be searched or the person or thing to be seized but rather authorize the bearer to search indiscriminately through service providers’ customer data?

What if the government has no moral, constitutional or legal right to personal information about and from all of us without a valid search warrant consistent with constitutional requirements?

What if raw intelligence data comes to the government without any proper names on it? What if in order to find those proper names, the government goes through a procedure called unmasking? What if lawful unmasking can only occur when the government knows that a national security problem is afoot and it needs to know the identity of the person whose communications it has in hand? What if the Constitution requires a search warrant to engage in unmasking?

What if the Obama administration made it easier for political appointees to unmask members of Congress and other government officials without demonstrating a national security need as a reason for doing so? What if unmasking for political purposes is a felony? What if it is common today?

Keep reading

Civil liberties group opposes Garda access to messages

Plans to force encrypted messaging apps like WhatsApp and Signal to give Gardaí access to private conversations would “profoundly undermine” digital security, the Irish Council for Civil Liberties (ICCL) has said.

In a statement issued this week, the group said cybersecurity experts were unanimous that so-called “backdoors” for law enforcement could not be created without also leaving users vulnerable to hackers and malicious actors.

“It is impossible to create ‘backdoor’ access pathways for law enforcement that can’t also be exploited,” the organisation said.

The ICCL added that encryption protects not only personal conversations but also online banking, shopping and wider digital activity.

“We all rely on encryption to safeguard our sensitive personal data when browsing, communicating or doing business online,” it said.

“Forcing companies to break their own encryption would profoundly undermine our digital security, as well as our fundamental rights to privacy and data protection.”

The council cited the position of the United Nations and the European Court of Human Rights in opposing laws that compromise encryption. It also highlighted the recent example of the UK government withdrawing a demand for Apple to install a backdoor into its cloud services, after the company refused.

“Apple stated it had never built – and never would build – backdoor access into any of its encrypted products,” the ICCL noted.

“Instead, Apple disabled its advanced data protection service in the UK and challenged the order in court.”

The group urged Justice Minister Jim O’Callaghan to reconsider his planned legislation, describing the proposals as “neither proportionate nor technically sound.”

It called for “transparent consultation with cybersecurity experts, civil society and technologists before proposing any legislation that could irreversibly damage digital privacy and cybersecurity.”

Last month, O’Callaghan told an audience that Gardaí must have powers to intercept modern communications.

“None of us would like to imagine living in a surveillance State,” he said.

Keep reading

The Fast-Approaching Digital Control Grid

Introduction

A digital control grid is an electronic network of digital telecommunication and information systems that allows individuals to be surveilled, tracked, and made subject to invasive controls applied to their financial transactions and resource use (such as electricity, food, water, transportation)—compromising, if not ending, all human rights and liberties. Control grids operate with significant data collection and AI to apply social credit systems that can be dictated on a highly centralized basis. A digital control grid ends financial freedom, replacing markets with technocracy—a system run by rules created and maintained centrally by “experts.”

Is the Trump Administration building a digital control grid? We provide the following checklist to assess the steps the Administration is (and is not) taking in a variety of areas to facilitate a rapid control grid build-out. We invite subscribers to post suggestions in the Comments section below.

The Big Picture

“Okay, let’s recap: REAL ID enforced; stablecoins incoming; mRNA Stargate project; TSA biometric overhaul; ICE using facial recognition; Palantir in 30+ federal agencies; Google/Amazon health data tracking; AI surveillance towers scanning highways. Surveillance State: engaged.”

Money

Summary: An all-digital currency and monetary system is essential to institute a digital control grid.

The GENIUS Act
There is support for legislation to create digital stablecoin infrastructure. Presumably, this can be used to create a programmable money system in both the U.S. and globally—in essence, a private CBDC.

More on the GENIUS Act (added July 18, 2025)
Exposing the Darkness Substack: Stablecoins “would likely eventually replace all cash, and would enable governments to freeze the accounts of anyone declared in violation of ‘lawful’ federal or state executive branch regulations, such as the vaccine mandates passed down in 2021 by [HHS]. Trump is doing the exact opposite of what he pledged…. He said he would ban CBDCs … but Stablecoins are in every important respect CBDCs.”

Armstrong Economics: “[E]ssentially, the government is turning the stablecoin into a digital dollar of sorts. The concern here is that this could delve into digitizing all currency and creating a CBDC. The act specifically provides the government with the authority to ‘block, freeze, and reject specific or impermissible transactions.’ This provision is not intended to protect the world against drug smugglers and thieves. This provision is intended to grant government unlimited control over how people spend stablecoins.”

Keep reading

Brother of Murdered Inmate Alleges FBI Role in OKC Bombing, Waco, and Decades of Domestic Spying, “Justice Will Come From Exposing PATCON”

A newly released book and an upcoming documentary are reviving attention on one of the FBI’s most secretive and controversial domestic spy programs known as “PATCON,” which was unmasked after a 30-year FOIA fight by Utah attorney Jesse Trentadue to prove his brother was murdered while in custody by federal agents in 1995.

Trentadue has uncovered, and is litigating to uncover, a total 2 million pages of documents so far. Two of his seven federal FOIA suits are still ongoing.

Trentadue is still litigating the release of government records from 1995, where his current case involves a request made in 2015 that the FBI sat on for 8 years and refused to respond to, involving records related to federal sting operations involving Timothy McVeigh from before the April 19, 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.

Yet his revealations to date has shown not just government lies about the Oklahoma City bombing, but also a domestic spying and criminal operations that extends into the nation’s newsrooms, courtrooms, centers of power, and more.

Despite new attention on the case and a wave of public interest in PATCON caused by the release of Margaret Roberts’ book “Blowback: The Untold Story of the FBI and the Oklahoma City Bombing” two weeks ago, Trentadue says he does not expect any federal agent or informant to face prosecution for his brother’s killing or for related crimes.

He’s hopeful, rather, that the documented evidence he has uncovered about FBI spying on the political right can be stopped, and that will be the most justice his family will ever find.

Keep reading

The U.S. Intervenes Against EU Digital Surveillance

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has launched a lobbying campaign against the EU’s Digital Services Act. With this step, Americans have become the last line of defense for the free speech rights of EU citizens.

If, in the past, President Donald Trump often spoke of the European Union as “a tough nut to crack,” he couldn’t have been more accurate. Freedom-loving EU citizens know exactly what he meant. In Brussels, a bizarre mélange of control fetishism, economic dirigisme, and isolation from the outside world has developed — a combination that is no longer tolerable.

Not least, Brussels’s fight against free expression in the digital sphere has revealed the true intentions of the von der Leyen Commission: the recovery of narrative dominance and control over political dissidence — achieved by cold-bloodedly sacrificing citizens’ fundamental freedoms.

U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance already issued multiple warnings in the spring about a European censorship empire. In a speech to the Senate, he denounced European digital legislation as an attack on western liberties. In his address at the Munich Security Conference, he went so far as to suggest cutting ties with the Europeans if they did not reverse their illiberal, dictatorial trajectory.

Criticism Bounces Off

As usual, American criticism fell on deaf ears in Brussels. Although Brussels swallowed the bitter pill of an asymmetrical trade deal with the U.S. two weeks ago, both the hidden protectionism disguised as climate regulation and harmonization standards, as well as the repressive digital laws, remain intact. This is detrimental not only to free speech among Europeans but also for American companies — undoubtedly a key target of the EU censors.

The EU’s discriminatory ambitions through the Digital Services Act (DSA) and the corresponding Digital Markets Act (DMA) primarily target U.S. communication platforms like X, Telegram, and Meta. If these platforms don’t conform to EU rules — granting access to internal communications and aiding Brussels’s surveillance efforts — they face billions in fines.

Much like Britain’s digital ID program, Brussels now masks its shamelessly invasive censorship with claims of youth protection and anti-hate measures. It’s tiresome to hear — but, as always, it’s about “their democracy,” or, to put it more accurately, a massive concrete barrier constructed to shield against the audacious citizen seeking to preserve privacy from an unbounded EU bureaucracy.

Keep reading

Leaked documents reveal Microsoft provided Israel’s Unit 8200 with tools to spy on Palestinians

  • Microsoft provided its Azure cloud platform to Israel’s Unit 8200, enabling mass surveillance of Palestinian communications.
  • Unit 8200 used Azure data to identify bombing targets in Gaza, leading to civilian casualties.
  • Microsoft claims ignorance but refuses to terminate its contract with Israeli military intelligence.
  • Investigations reveal Microsoft profits from war crimes while publicly promoting ethical AI principles.
  • Critics warn unchecked surveillance turns corporations into silent partners in oppression and human rights violations.

Microsoft isn’t exactly known for being ethical, but a shocking new exposé has exposed just how deep their complicity in war crimes runs. The Big Tech firm has been secretly providing Israel’s elite military intelligence Unit 8200 with its Azure cloud platform since 2021, enabling the storage and analysis of massive troves of Palestinian communications data.

According to a damning investigation by +972 Magazine, Local Call, and The Guardian, Microsoft’s technology has been weaponized to surveil millions of daily phone calls from Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, with Unit 8200 sources confirming the data was used to identify bombing targets in densely populated civilian areas. While Microsoft feigns ignorance, claiming its CEO was unaware of the data’s lethal purpose, the tech giant’s actions reveal a disturbing pattern of prioritizing profits over human lives… even as Palestinian civilians pay the ultimate price.

Keep reading

Germany Turns Its Back on Decades‑Old Privacy Protections with Sweeping Surveillance Bill

For half a century, Germany’s privacy laws were treated like sacred scripture. Politicians swore by them, courts fortified them, and bureaucrats turned them into a national export. Other countries rolled out surveillance programs; Germany rolled out lectures about why that was a terrible idea. It was all rooted in the same ugly history lesson: if you give the state a big enough file on you, sooner or later you’ll end up in it.

That memory ran deep. The Nazi regime used personal records like ammunition, and the East German Stasi built a domestic surveillance industry so bloated it could have applied for EU funding.

Postwar Germany responded by making privacy a central pillar of its democratic identity. The Federal Constitutional Court even invented a “right to informational self‑determination,” which sounded academic but translated roughly to: “The government doesn’t get to rummage through your life just because it’s bored.”

Privacy commissioners became feared watchdogs who could slap down ministries and corporations alike. Every time politicians tried to sneak through a new security law, they’d be met with lawsuits, public outrage, and years of procedural trench warfare. It was tedious, but that was the point; democracy is supposed to make snooping inconvenient.

Now comes the Interior Ministry’s summer special: a bill that would let authorities hack devices without suspicion, track every airline passenger automatically, and scrap independent oversight.

We obtained a copy of the bill for you here.

Keep reading

DIGITAL ID: The Shocking Plan to Kill Free Speech Forever

The U.S. is on the verge of launching a dystopian online surveillance machine—and disturbingly, Republicans are helping make it law.

The SCREEN Act and KOSA claim to protect kids, but they’re Trojan horses. If passed, every American adult would be forced to verify their ID to access the internet—just like in Australia, where “age checks” morphed into speech policing. In the UK, digital ID is already required for jobs, housing, and healthcare.

This is how they silence dissent: by tying your identity to everything you read, say, or buy online.

The trap is nearly shut. Once it locks in, online freedom vanishes forever.

Will Americans wake up before it’s too late? Watch Maria Zeee expose the full blueprint—and how little time we have left.

Keep reading

EU Revives Plan to Ban Private Messaging

The European Union is still wrestling with a controversial plan that would turn private messaging services into surveillance tools. For over three years, talks have stalled over whether providers should be forced to scan every user’s messages for possible illegal material and forward anything suspicious to law enforcement.

The European Commission is still pushing for a universal scanning requirement.

In contrast, the European Parliament insists any checks should apply only to unencrypted messages from people already under suspicion. Attempts to strike a deal have repeatedly fallen apart, with Poland the latest presidency to walk away without an agreement.

July brought a change in leadership of the Council of the EU, with Denmark stepping in and putting chat scanning back at the top of the legislative pile. Copenhagen wants this handled as a priority and wasted no time tabling a new draft on its very first day in charge.

Leaked records from a closed door July meeting show the Danish text closely tracks earlier proposals from Belgium and Hungary, with no concessions for encrypted conversations. A softer version from Poland, which would have made scanning voluntary and left encrypted chats alone, has been dropped entirely.

Out of 27 EU countries, 20 spoke during the July debate, each lodging what officials call a “comprehensive audit reservation.” Germany summed up the atmosphere by noting, “the familiar mood was clear.”

Italy, Spain, and Hungary have been in favor of mandatory chat scanning from the start. France could tip the balance since blocking the plan requires four countries representing at least 35 percent of the EU’s population. Paris has moved from tentative support to saying it could “basically support the proposal.”

Others remain cautious or opposed. Belgium, despite earlier enthusiasm, admits encrypted scanning is “a difficult topic nationally.” Estonia reports a “national conflict between security authorities and data protection officers regarding encryption and client-side scanning.” Austria is bound by a parliamentary vote against mandatory scanning or undermining encryption, a stance shared by the Netherlands. Luxembourg and Slovenia say they are still “not yet convinced.”

Keep reading