Tag: police state

FCC Chair Brendan Carr Wants More Control Over Social Media

In his short time as chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), Brendan Carr has been no stranger to using his power against disfavored entities. The chairman’s targets have primarily included broadcast networks and social media companies.

Recently, Carr revealed a fundamental misunderstanding about one of the most important laws governing the internet and social media.

On February 27, digital news outlet Semafor held a summit in Washington, D.C., titled “Innovating to Restore Trust in News,” which culminated in a conversation between Semafor editor-in-chief Ben Smith and Carr.

“The social media companies got more power over more speech than any institution in history” in recent years, Carr told Smith. “And I think they’re abusing that power. I think it’s appropriate for the FCC to say, let’s take another look at Section 230.”

Section 230 of the Communications Act effectively protects websites and platforms from civil liability for content posted by others. It also protects a platform’s decision to moderate content it finds “objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected.”

Like many conservatives, Carr looks askance at social media’s latitude to moderate content with what he perceives as impunity. “The FCC should issue an order that interprets Section 230 in a way that eliminates the expansive, non-textual immunities that courts have read into the statute” and “remind courts how the various portions of Section 230 operate,” he wrote in a chapter of The Heritage Foundation’s Mandate for Leadership, more popularly known as Project 2025.

Keep reading

California Proposal Would Prevent Coverage Of Medical Marijuana In Workers’ Compensation Cases

California officials are accepting public comment through mid-March on a plan that would remove medical marijuana as an accepted treatment for injured employees in workers’ compensation cases. The change would effectively prevent doctors in such cases from recommending marijuana and end any compensation to pay for cannabis medications.

The change being considered by the California Division of Workers’ Compensation (DWC) is based on recently updated guidelines from the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine (ACOEM) that say cannabinoids are “not recommended” for treatment of chronic, acute or postoperative pain and separately advising against cannabinoid use by safety-critical workers.

ACOEM in an update earlier this year listed various health risks associated with marijuana use—including cannabis use disorder, motor vehicle crashes, schizophrenia and others—and further said that evidence shows that cannabis is ineffective or only minimally effective at treating various types of pain.

As a result of the ACOEM update, the worker’s compensation division is weighing a change that would remove marijuana and related treatments from California’s medical treatment utilization schedule (MTUS) in workers’ comp cases.

Cannabis reform advocates and workers’ rights groups are pushing back against the proposal, saying it conflicts with numerous other studies indicating that marijuana can be effective for treating pain, and are urging supporters to file written comments with DWC ahead of a planned hearing on March 14.

“The recommendation flies in the face of scores of scientific studies,” Dale Gieringer, director of California NORML, said in an email, “including reports by the National Academy of Sciences and California’s Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research, plus the experience of countless California patients and doctors who have found medical cannabis valuable for treating intractable chronic pain.”

Keep reading

Washington Lawmakers Once Again Abandon Effort To Allow Adults To Grow Marijuana At Home

Democrats in the Washington State legislature have once again given up on a plan to legalize home cultivation of marijuana for personal use, opting instead to keep the conduct classified as a felony.

Lawmakers in the House Appropriations Committee did not act on the homegrow bill—HB 1449, from Rep. Shelley Kloba—before a legislative deadline on Friday, meaning it’s now dead for the session.

If enacted law, the bill would have allowed adults 21 and older to grow up to six cannabis plants at home for personal use, with households capped at 15 plants regardless of how many adults reside on the premises. People could also lawfully keep the marijuana produced by those plants despite the state’s existing one-ounce limit on possession.

Kloba and other supportive lawmakers have worked for nearly a decade to pass a law allowing adults to grow a small number of cannabis plants for their own use, but each year, other lawmakers and executive agencies have stood in the way of the proposal.

Kloba’s staff on Friday confirmed to Marijuana Moment that the bill would not move forward this year, saying that the lawmaker “will continue pursuing this policy” but declining to comment further.

Last year, Kloba sponsored HB 2194, which similarly died after not being called for a vote in the House Appropriations Committee.

After last year’s proposal failed to advance, Kloba similarly said she would continue to pursue the reform.

“Every session has its own character and constraints, which so far have meant that the bill has not advanced to the Senate,” she told Marijuana Moment at the time. “But I am not giving up.”

Washington was one of the first U.S. states to legalize adult-use marijuana, passing a ballot initiative in 2012. Growing marijuana for personal use without a state medical card, however, remains a Class C felony, carrying up to five years in prison and up to $10,000 in fines.

Legislative efforts to allow personal cultivation stretch back to at least 2015, but so far each has failed.

Keep reading

UN demands answers from UK on terror law abuse

As the British state harasses and arrests a growing number of activists and dissident journalists, including the author of this piece, UN rapporteurs delivered a forceful letter of protest to London condemning its abuse of counter-terror legislation.

In December 2024, a quartet of UN rapporteurs focused on “peaceful assembly and of association” and the “right to privacy” delivered a strongly-worded letter to the British government. Expressing grave concerns about the potential “misapplication of counter-terrorism laws” to arrest, detain, interrogate and surveil dissident activists and journalists, including The Grayzone’s Kit Klarenberg, they demanded clarity on a number of serious issues. Given 60 days to respond, London remained suspiciously silent.

As a result, the UN’s correspondence with the British government has now been made public. The rapporteurs were clearly disturbed by reports of Schedule 7 of the 2000 Terrorism Act, and Schedule 3 of the 2019 Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Act, which covers “hostile” state threats, “being used to examine and obtain data from journalists and activists Johanna Ross, John Laughland, Kit Klarenberg, Craig Murray and Richard Medhurst in circumstances where they appear to have no credible connection to ‘terrorist’ or ‘hostile’ activity.”

While awaiting a reply that never came, the UN “urged” British authorities to undertake “interim measures” to prevent any recurrence of potential human rights breaches under counter-terror legislation, and “ensure the accountability” of anyone responsible for “alleged violations.” Evidently undeterred by pressure from the UN, Britain has continued to escalate its war on dissidents. 

Since the UN issued its letter of protest, British activists and journalists have since been arrested, raided, and prosecuted, including Asa Winstanley, Tony Greenstein, Sarah Wilkinson, Palestine Action cofounder Richard Barnard, and academic David Miller.

The UN letter focused on how “powers under counter-terrorism legislation have been used on multiple occasions to examine, detain, and arrest journalists and activists, particularly at the UK border.” Individuals “who are critical of Western foreign policy in the context of the conflict in the Middle East and the Russia-Ukraine war are especially affected by the reported misuse of these powers,” the rapporteurs wrote. 

Ominously, the UN rapporteurs suggested this could amount to “over-use [or] misuse” of British counter-terrorism legislation “to target legitimate freedom of expression and opinion, including public interest media reporting, and related freedoms of peaceful assembly and association, and political dissent or activism.”

Keep reading

Echoes Of Trump: Georgescu Charged With Inciting Insurrection

Following the dramatic arrest of Călin Georgescu while on his way to submit his papers to file as a candidate in Romania’s rescheduled presidential election in May, the Prosecutor General’s Office of Romania has charged the country’s leading presidential candidate with inciting insurrection. The situation mirrors the one faced by Donald Trump in the run up to the 2024 election, except that in Romania’ fragile “democratic” system the charges may very well lead to the globalist elites maintaining their power unless massive external pressure is brought to bear.

In charges reminiscent of Communist show trials in the late 1940s and early 1950s, the authorities have charged Georgescu with “spreading false information,” and establishing a “fascist” organization, both popular catch phases of the radical left.

Listed among Georgescu’s other “crimes” is “promoting, in public, the cult of persons guilty of committing crimes of genocide against humanity and war crimes,” as well as “the act of promoting, in public, fascist, legionary, racist or xenophobic ideas, conceptions or doctrines,” because he has not followed the globalist narrative concerning Romanian history. Georgescu has said that Marshal Ion Antonescu, who bravely fought against the brutal Soviet rape of the country should be considered a national hero. It should be noted that Antonescu was a Romanian patriot who was only convicted of “war crimes” in a Communist show trial that resulted in his execution.

The purpose of these charges is to try to eliminate Călin Georgescu as a presidential candidate because he is the greatest threat to the country’s globalist establishment. Georgescu was released but has been placed under “judicial supervision” for 60 days in a move that is clearly a slap in the face to democratic values.

Keep reading

People Outraged After California Democrat Introduces Bill that Criminalizes Self-Defense – AB 1333 Limits Homeowner’s Right to Defend Self, Family and Home From Intruder

California is currently a ‘stand your ground’ state, however, a Democrat Assemblyman just introduced a bill that would criminalize self-defense.

California Assemblyman and Democrat Caucus Chair Rich Chavez Zbur introduced AB 1333 which seeks to limit a homeowner’s right to defend their family and home from an intruder.

This Democrat lunatic wants to limit a homeowner’s right to defend themselves from a dangerous intruder.

More than anything else, this is an attack on the Second Amendment.

“This bill would eliminate certain circumstances under which homicide is justifiable, including, among others, in defense of a habitation or property. The bill would additionally clarify circumstances in which homicide is not justifiable, including, among others, when a person uses more force than necessary to defend against a danger,” according to California Legislative Information.

“By expanding the scope of the crime of homicide, this bill would create a state-mandated local program,” the state said.

Rick Zbur tried to defend himself after people were outraged by his proposal.

Zbur defamed Kyle Rittenhouse as he tried to bat down critics.

“AB 1333 was never intended to limit a crime victim’s right to defend yourself, your family, or home. The goal is to prevent wannabe vigilantes like Kyle Rittenhouse from provoking violence & claiming self defense after the fact. We will amend the bill to make this crystal clear,” Zbur said.

Keep reading

Authorities Confiscated a Beloved Deer That a Woman Raised as a Pet — and Now the Animal Might Be Euthanized

Authorities confiscated a deer that a Pennsylvania woman had been keeping as a pet, according to the Pennsylvania Game Commission and multiple reports.

Tammy Shiery of Fayette County says that she and several members of her neighborhood have raised the 2-year-old deer — whom they named Baby — ever since they found him as a fawn, per CBS News affiliate KDKA News.

Shiery, 64, told the outlet that Baby has received all of the same vaccines that are required for deer on deer farms, and that she believed she had all of the necessary paperwork to legally keep Baby as a pet. 

However, Pennsylvania law states that deer can only be kept as domestic pets if they were born in captivity — which Baby was not. Shiery attempted to intervene when state authorities showed up to take Baby away and was subsequently arrested, per KDKA.

PEOPLE reached out to the Pennsylvania State Police but did not receive an immediate response.

The Pennsylvania Game Commission confirmed it has Baby in its custody, and he has not been euthanized at this point in time, per KDKA. The game commission also told the outlet that it is currently deciding on next steps for the animal.

Keep reading

A Tale of Two Continental Tyrannies

It will soon be 5 years since the initial Covid 2020 Lockdowns. This article builds on what was written by Dr Ramesh Thakur’s article “Pandemic in Africa: Lessons and Strategies” and Jeffrey Tucker’s article “The Mass Betrayal of Trust” by giving an on-the-ground-perspective comparison of the social interactions and costs that happened in response to all the Covid mandates in Europe and Africa.

When the lockdowns hit in 2020, I was in Europe having built a life there as an immigrant engineer with minimal knowledge of geopolitics and Public Health (My little knowledge of Public Health revolved around the free exercise classes and stress ball some public health officials came to give in my Church – I thought they were just harmless doves—common, who doesn’t love a free stress ball?). Imagine my shock in 2020, when this same group of “nice guys” suddenly began to yell at us to sit at home, else you are a selfish grandma killer. My second shock was the next-to-nothing pushback from Institutions that were supposed to/designed to push back against Government tyranny. Jeffrey Tucker details it all in his article “The Mass Betrayal of Trust”.

Keep reading

Ontario school children face compelled medical surveillance or suspension

Ontario school children are currently caught in the middle of an ongoing issue regarding student rights, medical privacy, and the power of public health authorities. Under the Immunization of School Pupils Act (ISPA), students attending Ontario schools are required to be vaccinated against certain diseases unless exempt for medical, religious, or philosophical reasons.

However, the recent push by public health officials to have students disclose their vaccination status and face suspension for non-compliance is raising serious privacy concerns.

The problem lies in the ambiguity between ISPA and the Education Act. ISPA stipulates vaccine requirements, but suspension orders are the responsibility of school principals under the Education Act, not public health authorities. This confusion is leading to violations of students’ fundamental right to a free public education, with some students at risk of being unlawfully suspended for failing to disclose their vaccination status.

The pressure to disclose private medical information is causing significant distress among parents and children alike. There are increasing concerns about the safety of centralized digital health databases, which have been vulnerable to data breaches and unauthorized access. With healthcare data a prime target for cyberattacks, parents are understandably worried about the security of their children’s sensitive medical records—which is big business for hackers.

Parents are resisting this growing pressure, with some viewing the disclosure demands as a violation of the Personal Health Information Protection Act (PHIPA). PHIPA requires informed consent before the collection of medical information and protects against coercion. However, the current approach by threatening suspension or else puts this principle into question.

The Ministry of Education was contacted for clarification, but media representatives Ingrid Anderson and Brook Campbell failed to respond days later. The inquiry focused on the confusion between ISPA and the Education Act, and how these conflicting laws are affecting students’ right to education. Additionally, clarification was sought on how medical privacy is being protected for parents wishing to uphold PHIPA.

Keep reading

Texas Judge Rejects Attorney General’s Attempt To Reverse Dallas Marijuana Decriminalization Law Approved By Voters

A Texas judge has shot down the Republican state attorney general’s attempt to block a local marijuana decriminalization law that voters approved at the ballot last November.

On Friday, 134th Civil District Court Judge Dale Tillery denied a motion for temporary injunction from Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) that sought to undermine the local law by allowing continued enforcement of cannabis criminalization in the state’s third most populous city.

The one-page order from the judge states: “Upon consideration of the pleadings, the application, responses, evidence, and oral arguments presented, if any, the Court finds that the application is hereby DENIED.”

This comes about a month after the Dallas Police Department instructed officers to stop arresting or citing people for possession of up to four ounces of marijuana, in accordance with the voter-approved ballot initiative.

Paxton had filed a lawsuit with the intent to invalidate the law just weeks after the November vote. It’s one of several examples of the state official attempting to leverage the court system to reverse local cannabis reform efforts.

Numerous Texas cities have enacted local decriminalization laws in recent years, and, last January, the attorney general similarly sought to block the reform in Austin, San Marcos, Killeen, Elgin and Denton.

State district judges dismissed two of the lawsuits—which argue that state law prohibiting marijuana preempts the local policies—in Austin and San Marcos. The city of Elgin reached a settlement, with the local government pointing out that decriminalization was never implemented there despite voter approval of the initiative.

Dallas lawmakers formally put the marijuana decriminalization initiative on the ballot in August after activists turned in sufficient petitions for the reform. Cannabis icon and music legend Willie Nelson had urged Dallas voters to pass the marijuana measure.

Prior to last August’s vote on ballot placement, some members of the Dallas City Council had expressed interest in streamlining the process of decriminalizing cannabis by acting legislatively, but plans to introduce the proposal at a hearing in June did not materialize, leaving the matter to voters.

Keep reading