Tag: police state

Trump administration confirms another federal agency involved in weaponization: the TSA

Move over FBI and IRS,  a new federal agency is garnering attention for alleged weaponization against Americans.

The Homeland Security Department announced Tuesday that an internal investigation uncovered “widespread abuses” carried out by the Biden administration’s Transportation Security Administration to make air travel “weaponized” against certain Americans.

The revelation that U.S. citizens were kept from flying over their political views drew immediate condemnation from Congress.

“It’s not American …. It’s another example of weaponization of our government that took place under the Biden administration,” Rep. Mark Harris, R-N.C., said. “It’s absolutely unacceptable.”

In a joint announcement with the TSA, Homeland Security said its investigative findings are being referred to the Justice Department.

In the announcement, acting agency TSA Administrator Ha Nguyen McNeill, said the Biden-era officials “under the direction and leadership” of previous TSA Administrator David Pekoske had “systematically watch-listed and denied boarding to those who exercised their individual rights and resisted mask mandates on airplanes nearly six months after the CDC relaxed its indoor mask mandate.”

The TSA also said the Biden TSA used the Capitol riot of January 2021 “as an excuse to target several dozen U.S. citizens” and that “these Americans were watch-listed and harassed despite there being no evidence of wrongdoing or illegal behavior.” 

The TSA said that “this targeted campaign of harassment continued through June 2021, six months after the events in question, despite no clear or immediate threat to aviation security.”

“These Biden-era officials continued to target Americans even after career intelligence officials and even Biden’s TSA Chief Privacy Officer sounded the alarm over these abusive actions,” the TSA said. “The Biden-era TSA’s actions demonstrate clear political bias. For example, these officials chose NOT to flag individuals who attacked law enforcement, burned down cities, and destroyed property during the widespread and violent George Floyd protests in 2020. During this abuse of power, some TSA officials raised serious concerns about these privacy violations and political targeting. They were ignored.”

“Biden’s TSA Administrator Pekoske and his cronies abused their authority and weaponized the federal government against the very people they were charged with protecting,” DHS Secretary Kristi Noem said on X on Tuesday. “Biden’s TSA wildly abused their authority, targeting Americans who posed no aviation security risk under the banner of political differences. President Trump promised to end the weaponization of government against the American people, and we are making good on that promise. I am referring this case to the Department of Justice and for Congressional investigation.”

Noem has directed TSA and DHS to refer the findings to DOJ’s Civil Rights Division and to Congress for further investigation, to remove “five senior leaders” who had “betrayed the trust of the American people” from their leadership positions, and to reorganize TSA’s Intelligence & Analysis office to hold senior officials accountable and to provide more extensive oversight on TSA’s watch-listing powers. TSA on Tuesday said that the removals included the executive assistant administrator for operations support and the deputy assistant administrator for intelligence and analysis.

Keep reading

Scottish Police Arrest Serial Speaker: Elderly Woman Charged After Holding Sign Offering to Discuss Abortion

Rose Docherty is what they call a criminal recidivist in the United Kingdom. The 75-year-old woman has been arrested for a second time for the same fiendish act: offering to speak to women considering an abortion. She was arrested  outside the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital in Glasgow for carrying a placard which stated “Coercion is a crime, here to talk, only if you want.” Fortunately, she and her sign were quickly seized by the local police to protect the public.

Free speech literally does not have a prayer in the United Kingdom. We previously discussed the case of Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, who was arrested for standing near an abortion clinic while silently praying. Police asked what she was doing standing at the location and when she said that she was praying in her head, they arrested her.

How Docherty ended up in the hoosegow in Glasgow is a chilling tale of how censorship can consume a nation.

The Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) Act came into force last September. The architect of the law, Scottish Green MSP Gillian Mackay, denounced protests of abortions as “totally unacceptable abuse and obstruction” outside hospitals. So it is now a crime to behave in ways that could influence the decisions of women and staff to access services within the buffer zones.

In other words, it is a crime to exercise free speech. In this case, the “unacceptable abuse” was offering to speak with other women about abortion.

The United Kingdom shows how limiting speech can create an insatiable appetite for greater and greater speech controls. I discuss the UK as a cautionary tale for the United States in my book, The Indispensable Right.

A man was convicted for sending a tweet while drunk referring to dead soldiers. Another was arrested for an anti-police t-shirt. Another was arrested for calling the Irish boyfriend of his ex-girlfriend a “leprechaun.” Yet another was arrested for singing “Kung Fu Fighting.” A teenager was arrested for protesting outside of a Scientology center with a sign calling the religion a “cult.”

British censorship now extends to not just silent prayers but toxic thoughts.

Keep reading

Not Only Tulsi: Three Members Of Congress Also Spied On In Quiet Skies Program

Ahead of Tuesday hearings on the subject, the Senate’s Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee (HSGAC) obtained documents showing three members of Congress, all Republicans, were followed under the TSA’s just-discontinued Quiet Skies program, which became infamous last summer when whistleblowers revealed bomb-sniffing dogs and Air Marshals were assigned to follow former Hawaii Congresswoman and future National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard.

The members’ names have not yet been publicly released, but they were turned over to the Committee by the Department of Homeland Security, along with “TSA” notes explaining how they ended up on the list. Two of the three members made it onto the list before being elected, but as the Committee notes, “a cursory review would have revealed them to be a member of Congress, or a decorated U.S. veteran or service member.” The list below looks like four entries, but the second and third are the same member.

A wealth of other information — not just about Quiet Skies but other questionable TSA practices — has been produced to the Committee chaired by Kentucky Senator Rand Paul. Among the revelations:

  • Documentation showing the TSA approved “enhanced screening” and watchlisting for individuals merely “suspected of traveling to the National Capital Region” in conjunction with January 6th, and who are “believed to pose an elevated risk” but for whom “there is a current lack of specific information relating to unlawful entry into the U.S. Capitol”;

At least 24 people were put into the program for being associated with a group the protested mask mandates, and 12 were placed on a watch list for removing their masks in-flight. The latter act was described in one memo as being “an act of extreme recklessness in carrying out an act that represents a threat to the life of passengers and crew”;

Keep reading

Report: EU to Charge Meta Under Censorship Law for Failing to Remove “Harmful” Content

Meta Platforms is bracing for formal charges from the European Union, accused of not doing enough to police online speech on Facebook and Instagram.

The problem is the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA), a law that gives regulators the power to decide what counts as “illegal” or “harmful” content (a definition that includes “illegal hate speech”) and punish companies that fail to take it down.

The commission’s move could lead to a fine of up to 6% of Meta’s worldwide revenue, though the company will be allowed to respond before any penalty is finalized.

Officials in Brussels argue that Meta lacks an adequate “notice and action mechanism” for users to flag posts for removal.

The charge sheet, expected within weeks, according to Bloomberg, builds on an investigation launched in April 2024.

What the EU describes as a duty to protect users is, in fact, a mandate that forces platforms to censor more aggressively or face ruinous fines.

The commission would not comment on its plans, but Meta spokesperson Ben Walters rejected the accusations outright, saying the company disagreed “with any suggestion we have breached the DSA” and confirmed that talks are ongoing.

The DSA covers every major platform with more than 45 million active users in the EU.

Meta is currently facing two separate probes under the law: one focused on disinformation and illegal content, the other on protections for minors.

Supporters of the DSA insist it protects citizens, but the law essentially hands governments the authority to decide what speech is acceptable online.

No fines have yet been issued, but the pressure to comply has already chilled open debate.

Keep reading

Trump’s Executive Order Against ‘Political Violence’ Is an Un-American Attack on Free Speech

Last week, President Donald Trump issued an executive order that purports to address the recent spate of political violence. But the order is remarkably one-sided, taking the apparent position that only leftists can be violent, and it treats speech clearly protected by the First Amendment as evidence of criminal behavior.

“Heinous assassinations and other acts of political violence in the United States have dramatically increased in recent years,” according to the order, titled “Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence.” It cites multiple recent events as examples—including the murder of Charlie Kirk, the foiled 2022 assassination plot against U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, and last week’s shooting at a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility.

“This political violence,” it continues, “is a culmination of sophisticated, organized campaigns of targeted intimidation, radicalization, threats, and violence designed to silence opposing speech, limit political activity, change or direct policy outcomes, and prevent the functioning of a democratic society.”

Notably, the order only lists violence against conservatives or targets favored by conservatives; it does not mention the June shooting of two Democratic Minnesota lawmakers, one of whom died. It also elides the fact that in the shooting of an ICE facility, the only victims were migrants in custody.

The order also uses padded statistics, citing “a more than 1,000 percent increase in attacks” on ICE officers “since January 21, 2025, compared to the same period last year.” But that represents a starting point of very few alleged assaults last year, and the increase seems largely to be a result of minor scuffles taking place during ICE enforcement actions.

Perhaps most troubling of all, though, the executive order lists First Amendment-protected speech as evidence of criminality that requires federal intervention.

“These movements portray foundational American principles (e.g., support for law enforcement and border control) as ‘fascist’ to justify and encourage acts of violent revolution,” the order claims. “This ‘anti-fascist’ lie has become the organizing rallying cry used by domestic terrorists to wage a violent assault against democratic institutions, constitutional rights, and fundamental American liberties. Common threads animating this violent conduct include anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, and anti-Christianity; support for the overthrow of the United States Government; extremism on migration, race, and gender; and hostility towards those who hold traditional American views on family, religion, and morality.”

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

Afghan women lose their ‘last hope’ as Taliban shuts down internet

Fahima Noori had big dreams when she graduated from university in Afghanistan.

She had studied law, graduated from a midwifery programme and even worked in a mental health clinic.

But all that was taken away when the Taliban swept into power in 2021. They banned girls over the age of 12 from getting an education, severely restricted job options for women and recently removed books written by women from universities.

For Fahima, the internet was her last lifeline to the outside world.

“I recently enrolled in an online university [and] I had hoped to finish my studies and find an online job,” she said.

On Tuesday, that lifeline was cut off when the Taliban imposed a nationwide internet shutdown that is set to last indefinitely.

“Our last hope was online learning. Now [even] that dream has been destroyed,” said Fahima.

Her real name has been changed to protect her identity, as have the names of all others interviewed for this article.

Keep reading

Denmark Bans Civilian Drone Flights Ahead of EU Summit

Denmark banned civilian drone flights on Sept. 28 ahead of a meeting of European Union leaders in the country later this week.

The move comes after unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) were observed at several military facilities on Sept. 28. Other drone activity forced the temporary closures of several Danish airports on Sept. 22.

Copenhagen Airport itself was shut for almost four hours.

The ban barred civilian drones from Danish airspace from Sept. 29 through Oct. 3, when Denmark, which holds the rotating presidency of the EU for the second half of this year, will be hosting European leaders.

Violations are punishable by a fine or imprisonment for up to two years.

“We are currently in a difficult security situation, and we must ensure the best possible working conditions for the armed forces and the police when they are responsible for security during the EU summit,” Danish Defense Minister Troels Lund Poulsen said on Sept. 28.

Keep reading

FBI’s Patel gave New Zealand officials 3D-printed guns illegal to possess under local laws

On a visit to New Zealand, FBI Director Kash Patel gave the country’s police and spy bosses gifts of inoperable pistols that were illegal to possess under local gun laws and had to be destroyed, New Zealand law enforcement agencies told The Associated Press.

The plastic 3D-printed replica pistols formed part of display stands Patel presented to at least three senior New Zealand security officials in July. Patel, the most senior Trump administration official to visit the country so far, was in Wellington to open the FBI’s first standalone office in New Zealand.

Pistols are tightly restricted weapons under New Zealand law and possessing one requires an additional permit beyond a regular gun license. Law enforcement agencies didn’t specify whether the officials who met with Patel held such permits, but they couldn’t have legally kept the gifts if they didn’t.

It wasn’t clear what permissions Patel had sought to bring the weapons into the country. A spokesperson for Patel told the AP Tuesday that the FBI would not comment.

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