Tag: police state

GrapheneOS Quits France, Citing Unsafe Climate for Open Source Tech

GrapheneOS, the privacy-focused Android operating system, has ended all operations in France, saying the country is no longer a safe place for open source privacy projects.

Although French users will still be able to install and use the software, the project is moving every related service, including its website, forums, and discussion servers, outside French territory.

Until now, GrapheneOS used OVH Bearharnois, a hosting provider based in France, for some of its infrastructure. That setup is being dismantled.

The Mastodon, Discourse, and Matrix servers will operate from Toronto on a mix of local and shared systems. These changes are designed to remove any dependency on French service providers.

The developers said their systems do not collect or retain confidential user data and that no critical security infrastructure was ever stored in France. Because of that, the migration will not affect features such as update verification, digital signature checks, or downgrade protection.

The decision also applies to travel and work policies. Team members have been told not to enter France, citing both personal safety concerns and the government’s endorsement of the European Union’s Chat Control proposal.

That measure would allow authorities to scan private communications for illegal material, something privacy developers see as incompatible with secure digital design.

Keep reading

Italy moves to follow European neighbors in banning religious garb like burqas that hide identity

Italy has long been one of Europe’s strongest defenders of religious freedom despite the influence of the Vatican.

But now, the country is poised to outlaw the use of traditional Islamic attire like burqas, a move the government says will strengthen its tradition of religious liberty by requiring all faiths to operate with “full transparency” and within the limits of Italian law.

The proposed law, which is set to be debated in Italy’s parliament before the end of this year, would ban “religiously motivated garments that obscure identity or impose non-transparent forms of [religious] affiliation,” according to a draft of the proposal published in the Italian media.

While the text does not mention Islam or any other faith by name, all indications are that it is primarily aimed at banning the use of headscarves, niqabs, jilbabs, burqas, and other attire that commonly obscure the identity of Muslim women.

The proposal is the latest in a series of steps from the Italian government led by Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni to regulate the public expression of religion. Officials insist the plan is part of an effort to modernize the Italian framework on religious practice that has not seen substantial change since the 1980s.

Supporters of the law say that a person’s visible identity – in schools, businesses, or in public – is essential for security and civic cohesion.

“This is not about limiting religious freedom, but about preventing it being used instrumentally in order to justify practices that are incompatible with the principles of our constitution and our society,” Galeazzo Bignami, a member of parliament from Meloni’s Brothers of Italy party, told reporters last month.

“No community in our country can claim exemptions from the laws of our Republic,” Minister of the Interior and Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini said via social media.

Other European countries including France, Belgium, and Austria have issued nationwide restrictions on traditional Islamic garb. And in Italy, local temporary bans on some kinds of Islamic face coverings have appeared on the municipal level, usually on grounds of public order or security. But the new proposal would be the first to be imposed nationally.

Muslim leaders responded with alarm, and some have vowed to appeal the measure if it is enacted.

“This law tells Muslim women they cannot appear in public as themselves,” said Yassine Lafram, head of the Union of Islamic Communities in Italy. “It sends a message that we are a problem to be managed rather than citizens with the same rights as other citizens.”

It is unclear whether the proposal will stand up to legal challenges if it becomes a law. Article 19 of the Italian Constitution guarantees the right to “profess one’s faith in any form, individually or collectively.” Critics say that the focus on “transparency” is too vague to merit an exception to that standard.

Keep reading

UK Government “Resist” Program Monitors Citizens’ Online Posts

Let’s begin with a simple question. What do you get when you cross a bloated PR department with a clipboard-wielding surveillance unit?

The answer, apparently, is the British Government Communications Service (GCS). Once a benign squad of slogan-crafting, policy-promoting clipboard enthusiasts, they’ve now evolved (or perhaps mutated) into what can only be described as a cross between MI5 and a neighborhood Reddit moderator with delusions of grandeur.

Yes, your friendly local bureaucrat is now scrolling through Facebook groups, lurking in comment sections, and watching your aunt’s status update about the “new hotel down the road filling up with strangers” like it’s a scene from Homeland. All in the name of “societal cohesion,” of course.

Once upon a time, the GCS churned out posters with perky slogans like Stay Alert or Get Boosted Now, like a government-powered BuzzFeed.

But now, under the updated “Resist” framework (yes, it’s actually called that), the GCS has been reprogrammed to patrol the internet for what they’re calling “high-risk narratives.”

Not terrorism. Not hacking. No, according to The Telegraph, the new public enemy is your neighbor questioning things like whether the council’s sudden housing development has anything to do with the 200 migrants housed in the local hotel.

It’s all in the manual: if your neighbor posts that “certain communities are getting priority housing while local families wait years,” this, apparently, is a red flag. An ideological IED. The sort of thing that could “deepen community divisions” and “create new tensions.”

This isn’t surveillance, we’re told. It’s “risk assessment.” Just a casual read-through of what that lady from your yoga class posted about a planning application. The framework warns of “local parental associations” and “concerned citizens” forming forums.

And why the sudden urgency? The new guidance came hot on the heels of a real incident, protests outside hotels housing asylum seekers, following the sexual assault of a 14-year-old girl by Hadush Kebatu, an Ethiopian migrant.

Now, instead of looking at how that tragedy happened or what policies allowed it, the government’s solution is to scan the reaction to it.

What we are witnessing is the rhetorical equivalent of chucking all dissent into a bin labelled “disinformation” and slamming the lid shut.

Keep reading

On This Day in 1865: Democrats Pass Nation’s First ‘Black Codes’ to Impose Near Slavery on African Americans

The more things change – the more they stay the same.

On November 22, 1865, Mississippi Democrats passed black codes to impose near slavery on African Americans in the state.

Democrats didn’t want those blacks to see any success in life. Today Democrats do that by “representing” blacks in political office but doing nothing to improve their lives in the hood.

Grand Old Partisan reported:

According to these Democrat laws, African-Americans could not:

 • vote

 • serve on juries

 • testify against white people

 • own guns

 • travel without permission

 • assemble for political purposes

 • own farmland

 • be outdoors at night

 • change jobs without permission

Democrats decreed that all African-Americans had to:

 •sign annual labor contracts with white masters

 • be deferential to all white people

 • be apprenticed (in practice, enslaved) to white masters until adulthood

 • work only in agriculture and a few other occupations

Fortunately, after winning a two-thirds majority in Congress, Republicans swept away these black codes.

Keep reading

The Algorithm Accountability Act’s Threat to Free Speech

A new push in Congress is taking shape under the banner of “algorithmic accountability,” but its real effect would be to expand the government’s reach into online speech.

Senators John Curtis (R-UT) and Mark Kelly (D-AZ) have introduced the Algorithm Accountability Act, a bill that would rewrite Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act to remove liability protections from large, for-profit social media platforms whose recommendation systems are said to cause “harm.”

We obtained a copy of the bill for you here.

The proposal applies to any platform with more than a million users that relies on algorithms to sort or recommend content.

These companies would be required to meet a “duty of care” to prevent foreseeable bodily injury or death.

If a user or family member claims an algorithm contributed to such harm, the platform could be sued, losing the legal shield that has protected online speech for nearly three decades.

Although the bill’s authors describe it as a safety measure, the structure of the law would inevitably pressure platforms to suppress or downrank lawful content that might later be portrayed as dangerous.

Most major social networks already rely heavily on automated recommendation systems to organize and personalize information. Exposing them to lawsuits for what those systems display invites broad, quiet censorship under the guise of caution.

Keep reading

Brazil’s ex-president Bolsonaro detained by police

Former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, who had been under house arrest in the country’s capital, Brasilia, has been detained by police officers, his lawyer has confirmed.

In September, the Brazilian Supreme Court sentenced Bolsonaro to 27 years in prison after he was found guilty of attempting to overturn the results of the country’s 2022 presidential election. The 70-year-old, who denies any wrongdoing, had been under house arrest since early August, appealing the ruling.

Bolsonaro’s attorney Celso Vilardi did not provide the reason for his client’s detention, but it happened shortly before the former president’s supporters had planned to hold a vigil near his home.

According to Reuters, Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes ordered Bolsonaro to be taken into custody, citing the risk of the activists hampering the police monitoring of his house arrest. The judge also pointed to evidence of tampering with the politician’s ankle monitor the night before, the agency said.

Keep reading

Victory! Court Ends Dragnet Electricity Surveillance Program in Sacramento

A California judge ordered the end of a dragnet law enforcement program that surveilled the electrical smart meter data of thousands of Sacramento residents.

The Sacramento County Superior Court ruled that the surveillance program run by the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) and police violated a state privacy statute, which bars the disclosure of residents’ electrical usage data with narrow exceptions. For more than a decade, SMUD coordinated with the Sacramento Police Department and other law enforcement agencies to sift through the granular smart meter data of residents without suspicion to find evidence of cannabis growing.

EFF and its co-counsel represent three petitioners in the case: the Asian American Liberation Network, Khurshid Khoja, and Alfonso Nguyen. They argued that the program created a host of privacy harms—including criminalizing innocent people, creating menacing encounters with law enforcement, and disproportionately harming the Asian community.

The court ruled that the challenged surveillance program was not part of any traditional law enforcement investigation. Investigations happen when police try to solve particular crimes and identify particular suspects. The dragnet that turned all 650,000 SMUD customers into suspects was not an investigation.

“[T]he process of making regular requests for all customer information in numerous city zip codes, in the hopes of identifying evidence that could possibly be evidence of illegal activity, without any report or other evidence to suggest that such a crime may have occurred, is not an ongoing investigation,” the court ruled, finding that SMUD violated its “obligations of confidentiality” under a data privacy statute.

Granular electrical usage data can reveal intimate details inside the home—including when you go to sleep, when you take a shower, when you are away, and other personal habits and demographics.

Keep reading

The UK and Canada Lead the West’s Descent into Digital Authoritarianism

“Big Brother is watching you.” These chilling words from George Orwell’s dystopian masterpiece, 1984, no longer read as fiction but are becoming a bleak reality in the UK and Canada—where digital dystopian measures are unravelling the fabric of freedom in two of the West’s oldest democracies.

Under the guise of safety and innovation, the UK and Canada are deploying invasive tools that undermine privacy, stifle free expression, and foster a culture of self-censorship. Both nations are exporting their digital control frameworks through the Five Eyes alliance, a covert intelligence-sharing network uniting the UK, Canada, US, Australia, and New Zealand, established during the Cold War.

Simultaneously, their alignment with the United Nations’ Agenda 2030, particularly Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 16.9—which mandates universal legal identity by 2030—supports a global policy for digital IDs, such as the UK’s proposed Brit Card and Canada’s Digital Identity Program, which funnel personal data into centralized systems under the pretext of “efficiency and inclusion.” By championing expansive digital regulations, such as the UK’s Online Safety Act and Canada’s pending Bill C-8, which prioritize state-defined “safety” over individual liberties, both nations are not just embracing digital authoritarianism—they’re accelerating the West’s descent into it.

The UK’s Digital Dragnet

The United Kingdom has long positioned itself as a global leader in surveillance. The British spy agency, Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), runs the formerly secret mass surveillance programme, code-named Tempora, operational since 2011, which intercepts and stores vast amounts of global internet and phone traffic by tapping into transatlantic fibre-optic cables. Knowledge of its existence only came about in 2013, thanks to the bombshell documents leaked by the former National Security Agency (NSA) intelligence contractor and whistleblower, Edward Snowden. “It’s not just a US problem. The UK has a huge dog in this fight,” Snowden told the Guardian in a June 2013 report. “They [GCHQ] are worse than the US.”

Following that is the Investigatory Powers Act (IPA) 2016, also dubbed the “Snooper’s Charter,” which mandates that internet service providers store users’ browsing histories, emails, texts, and phone calls for up to a year. Government agencies, including police and intelligence services (like MI5, MI6, and GCHQ) can access this data without a warrant in many cases, enabling bulk collection of communications metadata. This has been criticized for enabling mass surveillance on a scale that invades everyday privacy.

Recent expansions under the Online Safety Act (OSA) further empower authorities to demand backdoors to encrypted apps like WhatsApp, potentially scanning private messages for vaguely defined “harmful” content—a move critics like Big Brother Watch, a privacy advocacy group, decry as a gateway to mass surveillance. The OSA, which received Royal Assent on October 26, 2023, represents a sprawling piece of legislation by the UK government to regulate online content and “protect” users, particularly children, from “illegal and harmful material.”

Implemented in phases by Ofcom, the UK’s communications watchdog, it imposes duties on a vast array of internet services, including social media, search engines, messaging apps, gaming platforms, and sites with user-generated content, forcing compliance through risk assessments and hefty fines. By July 2025, the OSA was considered “fully in force” for most major provisions. This sweeping regime, aligned with global surveillance trends via Agenda 2030’s push for digital control, threatens to entrench a state-sanctioned digital dragnet, prioritizing “safety” over fundamental freedoms.

Elon Musk’s platform X has warned that the act risks “seriously infringing” on free speech, with the threat of fines up to £18 million or 10% of global annual turnover for non-compliance, encouraging platforms to censor legitimate content to avoid punishment. Musk took to X to express his personal view on the act’s true purpose: “suppression of the people.”

Keep reading

Senior citizen who saved himself from would-be mugger is heading to prison because of NYC’s ‘draconian’ laws

A Queens senior citizen who shot dead a man who tried to rob him will spend four years in prison after admitting to toting an unlicensed revolver — as his lawyer ripped the city’s “draconian” gun laws.

Charles Foehner, 67, pleaded guilty to one count of criminal weapons possession Thursday in a deal to end his case more than two years after he fatally shot would-be thief Cody Gonzalez, who charged at him near his Kew Gardens home.

The Queens District Attorney’s Office chose not to prosecute Foehner, a retired doorman, for Gonzalez’s killing after he told cops that he’d defended himself from a mugger who lunged at him late at night holding what looked like a knife — but which turned out to be a pen.

But prosecutors slapped Foehner with a slew of weapons raps for the unlicensed handgun and for an arsenal of illicit handguns, revolvers and rifles inside his home in the quiet neighborhood.

Foehner took the plea deal to avoid a trial, where he faced 25 years in prison on gun charges that are not hard to prove, said his attorney Thomas Kenniff after Thursday’s hearing in Queens Supreme Court.

Keep reading

Rand Paul Slams Alcohol And Marijuana Interests Over Federal Hemp Ban, Announcing He’ll File A Bill To Reverse It Next Week

A GOP senator says he’ll be filing a bill next week to protect the hemp industry from an impending federal ban on most cannabinoid products. He’s also calling out alcohol and marijuana interests for allegedly “join[ing] forces” to lobby in favor of the prohibitionist policy change, which will restrict access to a plant and its derivatives that are often used therapeutically—including by members of his Senate colleagues’ families.

In an interview on “The Chris Cuomo Project” podcast that was posted on Thursday, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) previewed his plan to push back against the hemp ban that was included in major spending legislation President Donald Trump signed into law last week.

Paul has been sounding the alarm for weeks about the potential consequences of the hemp recriminalization provisions, which he says would cause mass job losses and a $25 billion industry to be “wiped out.”

As he previewed during a separate webinar organized by the Kentucky Hemp Association on Wednesday, the senator told Cuomo that he intends to introduce legislation next week that would make it so state policy regulating hemp cannabinoid products—with basic safeguards in place to prevent youth access, for example—”supersedes the federal law.”

Keep reading