Tag: police state

Thought Police: Home Visit For UK Man Who Expressed Anger Online About Sydney Bishop Being Stabbed by Islamist

A video out of the UK shows a man being visited at home by two police officers and an NHS psychologist after he expressed anger online about the stabbing of a Bishop in Sydney by an Islamist.

Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel was stabbed by a 16-year-old boy at the Assyrian Christ the Good Shepherd church on Monday night, an attack that was caught on camera.

The teenager walked right up to the bishop as he was giving a sermon and furiously jabbed at him with a knife while shouting “Allahu Akbar” as onlookers desperately tried to wrestle him to the ground.

After the teen was pinned down, he could be seen smirking.

Now a new video has emerged showing how an Orthodox Christian man in the UK received a home visit from police and a psychologist for reportedly posting online, “Christians must stand up.”

The clip shows a female officer explaining how authorities had “a few concerns” about what the man had posted on social media.

“So why are you here today?” asks the man.

The woman says the police have been told the man “might have a few concerns, a few things that are bothering you at the moment.”

“This is religious discrimination,” responds the man, asserting that the police wouldn’t be knocking on the door of a Muslim if they had made similar statements.

“People raised concerns about your views…about what’s going on in Australia,” the police officer continues.

“Yeah, so I’m an Orthodox Christian, now you’ve turned up at my house because I went and seen my priest,” the man responds.

The NHS psychologist reiterated that there was a report about “some beliefs being expressed” and that he was there to ‘help’ the man.

Keep reading

Telegram Founder Reveals US Government’s Alleged Covert Maneuvers to Backdoor The App

What a shocker. Is this really newsworthy? Actually yes – because here, we’re seeing the opposite of clickbait – a subdued, to put it generously, headline in legacy US media, in an attempt to report about some of the things Telegram CEO Pavel Durov said during his interview with Tucker Carlson.

But behind this headline lies a pretty explosive, even if not surprising story – of how countries (in reality, more likely than one, but in this case, one is named) view the backbone of internet safety and integrity, namely – reliable, secure encryption.

Long story short – they view it as the enemy.

Durov, a Russian now in possession of multiple passports, based in Dubai, UAE, and often apparently butting heads with snooping efforts from governments (including Russian) revealed during the interview how the government in Washington one time tried to “break into Telegram,” as he put it.

But really, doing this successfully, given the nature of the encrypted app, would have meant not just breaking “into” – but, breaking Telegram.

Keep reading

Colorado Senate Passes Bill That Could Ban Social Media Users Who Post Positively About Drugs—Including Legal Psychedelics

Colorado’s Senate has approved a sweeping social media bill that, among other provisions, could force platforms to ban users for talking positively online about certain controlled substances, such as state-legal psychedelics, certain hemp products and even some over-the-counter cough syrups.

The legislation, SB24-158—a broad proposal concerning internet age verification and content policies—would require social media platforms to immediately remove any user “who promotes, sells, or advertises an illicit substance.”

Initially that provision would have applied to all controlled substances under state law—including state-legal marijuana—but an amendment last month from the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Chris Hansen (D), includes language saying that “a social media platform may allow a user to promote, sell, or advertise medical marijuana or retail marijuana to users who are at least twenty-one years of age” so long as the content complies with state cannabis laws.

The amended legislation would still apply to numerous other legal and illegal substances.

On Wednesday, the Senate voted 30–1 to pass the revised measure on third reading, with four members excused.

Earlier this week, the Senate Appropriations Committee also adopted two amendments to the bill, including one adding staff funding for the state attorney general’s office and another that could make the act subject to voter approval in November.

Critics say even with the marijuana-related amendment, the bill could create major problems for users trying to post benign—and legal—content around substances like cough medicine.

Keep reading

TYRANNY: Bank of America, USAA ‘Debank’ Conservative Election Fraud Attorney Dr. John Eastman

Two major banks have closed the accounts of conservative attorney John Eastman in retaliation for his advocacy against Democratic election fraud.

The Daily Caller reports that Eastman, who was recently disbarred by a left-wing judge in California over his efforts to expose massive fraud that marred the 2020 presidential election, had bank accounts with Bank of America and USAA closed without warning.

Eastman confirmed that he had already moved most of his money from Bank of America to USAA over concerns that the former was involved in leftist advocacy. Both of these accounts are federally insured and received massive taxpayer bailouts during the 2008 financial crisis.

Yet despite their links to the federal government, Eastman revealed that both of his accounts were closed within the space of two months.

Keep reading

Down with Big Brother: Warrantless Surveillance Makes a Mockery of the Constitution

“Whether he wrote DOWN WITH BIG BROTHER, or whether he refrained from writing it, made no difference … The Thought Police would get him just the same … the arrests invariably happened at night … In the vast majority of cases there was no trial, no report of the arrest. People simply disappeared, always during the night. Your name was removed from the registers, every record of everything you had ever done was wiped out, your one-time existence was denied and then forgotten. You were abolished, annihilated: vaporized was the usual word.”—George Orwell, 1984

The government long ago sold us out to the highest bidder.

The highest bidder, by the way, has always been the Deep State.

What’s playing out now with the highly politicized tug-of-war over whether Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act gets reauthorized by Congress doesn’t just sell us out, it makes us slaves of the Deep State.

Read the fine print: it’s a doozy.

Just as the USA Patriot was perverted from its stated intent to fight terrorism abroad and was instead used to covertly crack down on the American people (allowing government agencies to secretly track Americans’ financial activities, monitor their communications, and carry out wide-ranging surveillance on them), Section 702 has been used as an end-run around the Constitution to allow the government to collect the actual content of your conversations (phone calls, text messages, video chats, emails and other electronic communication) without a warrant.

Now intelligence officials are pushing to dramatically expand the government’s spying powers, effectively giving the government unbridled authority to force millions of Americans to spy on its behalf.

Basically, the Deep State wants to turn the American people into extensions of Big Brother.

Keep reading

Biden Opposes Bill That Would Keep Cops and Feds From Buying Your Data

A bipartisan group of lawmakers is once again trying to keep the government from performing an end run around the Fourth Amendment by buying people’s personal data. This week, President Joe Biden indicated that he opposed the bill.

H.R. 4639, known as the Fourth Amendment Is Not For Sale Act, “expands prohibited disclosures of stored electronic communications” to include purchases of data by law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

First introduced in 2021 by Sens. Ron Wyden (D–Ore.), Rand Paul (R–Ky.), Patrick Leahy (D–Vt.), and Mike Lee (R–Utah), the bill has been reintroduced in subsequent sessions. The current version was introduced in the House by Rep. Warren Davidson (R–Ohio) and in the Senate by Wyden and Paul.

On Wednesday, Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D–N.Y.), ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee and one of the House bill’s cosponsors, affirmed his support on the House floor. “That anyone should have Americans’ private information is highly troubling to me,” Nadler said. “But that our federal government can obtain it without a warrant should be troubling to all of us.”

On Tuesday, the White House announced that the Biden administration “strongly opposes” the bill. According to a Statement of Administration Policy, the bill “generally would prohibit the Intelligence Community and law enforcement from obtaining certain commercially available information—subject only to narrow, unworkable exceptions.”

The Stored Communications Act forbids technology companies from disclosing certain subscriber information, including to the government. But certain types of data—including search histories, credit reports, employment records, and cellphone geolocation data—is “commercially available” and can be sold by third parties called data brokers. Often this data is purchased by private companies in order to better tailor their ad spending.

Governments typically need a warrant to access any of that type of information—as recently as 2018, the Supreme Court affirmed in Carpenter v. United States that the government cannot access a person’s cellphone location data without a warrant. “Although such records are generated for commercial purposes,” wrote Chief Justice John Roberts, that alone did not “negate” the plaintiff’s expectation of privacy. “We decline to grant the state unrestricted access to a wireless carrier’s database of physical location information.”

Put simply: Come back with a warrant.

But instead of honoring that decision, law enforcement and intelligence agencies just started buying the information from data brokers instead: The National Security Agency (NSA) buys people’s internet metadata, and agencies within the Department of Homeland Security—including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP)—purchase cellphone location data.

Keep reading

Researchers Ask Federal Court To Block DEA From Banning Two Psychedelics Under ‘Unconstitutional’ Administrative Process

Researchers are asking a federal court to block the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) from proceeding in its attempt to ban two psychedelics, arguing that the agency’s administrative approach to the proposed scheduling is unconstitutional.

Panacea Plant Sciences (PPS) filed a complaint and request for injunctive relief against DEA in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington last week.

The legal challenge focuses on the agency’s recent scheduling of an administrative hearing to receive expert input on its controversial plans to classify 2,5-dimethoxy-4-iodoamphetamine (DOI) and 2,5-dimethoxy-4-chloroamphetamine (DOC) as Schedule I drugs under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA).

The filing doesn’t speak to the merits of the scheduling proposal—an issue that psychedelics researchers have previously addressed in public comment. Rather, PPS is contesting the administrative hearing process that’s preceding final rulemaking, arguing that DEA’s reliance on administrative law judges (ALJs) to settle such arbitration is unconstitutional based on U.S. Supreme Court precedent.

PPS said that because the Supreme Court has held that ALJs are considered “inferior officers,” current statutory removal protections unconstitutionally insulate them from executive control under Article II of the Constitution. That means DEA should not be permitted to subject researchers to an administrative hearing concerning the psychedelic scheduling proposal, the filing says.

“The hearing and scheduling poses a significant threat to the company,” it says. “PPS conducts research and development on medical technologies which include the use of DOI or DOC for development and as products themselves. Currently, DOI and DOC are not controlled.”

“Under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) and its implementing regulations, PPS will be required to turn over to law enforcement or destroy our stock of DOI and DOC which means the rule-making acts as an effective taking of property,” the document says.

“As a result, when PPS received the hearing notice from DEA, it was faced with a stark choice: either default and lose automatically or defend itself against the DEA’s attempts to schedule DOI and DOC and its use of an ALJ-overseen adjudication,” it continues. “PPS is thus compelled to participate in the DEA’s adjudicatory proceedings.”

Keep reading

Supercharged Spying Provision Buried In “Terrifying” FISA 702 Reauthorization

On Monday, the House finalized procedural business on a bill to reauthorize the nation’s warrantless surveillance powers under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) called “one of the most dramatic and terrifying expansions of government surveillance authority in history.”

“I will do everything in my power to stop it from passing in the Senate,” said Wyden in a Friday post to X.

Wyden is right…

In a Sunday night thread on X from Elizabeth Goitein, co-director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, breaks down why this is so ‘terrifying.’

“Buried in the Section 702 reauthorization bill (RISAA) passed by the House on Friday is the biggest expansion of domestic surveillance since the Patriot Act. Senator Wyden calls this power “terrifying,” and he’s right,” the thread begins.

Keep reading

Fentanyl Fear Factor: White House Leverages Drug Scare to Push for Controversial Surveillance Powers

In a recent public appeal, the Biden administration has urged the reauthorization Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) before it expires on April 19. Bill Burns, the CIA Director, issued a statement, alleging the significant role of the FISA powers in fighting threats against national security, especially the illicit trafficking of fentanyl into the United States.

Burns highlighted the gravity of the fentanyl threat, saying, “The threat to the US posed by fentanyl and other synthetic opioids is real. Section 702 is an essential tool in CIA’s mission to protect the American people from a range of threats, including illicit fentanyl trafficking. Without this vital program, CIA simply would not be able to defend our country as effectively in as many dangerous corners of the world.”

Echoing the CIA Director’s stance, the White House has also underlined the importance of the reauthorization bill in ensuring national security. National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby further stressed the significance of bipartisan support for this endeavor. He stated, “Obviously we strongly support the bipartisan effort to get 702 reauthorized. It is vital to our ability to defend ourselves, defend … the American people, and we very much want to see it move forward — get extended and move forward.”

It’s worth noting that Section 702 of FISA authorizes US government officials to collect electronic communications without needing a warrant. This provision has been a point of contention, with privacy advocates arguing that it infringes on personal freedom.

Keep reading

Big Brother in Training? How Proposed Legislation Might Pave the Way for Online Age Verification and Digital ID

Bipartisan legislative efforts are underway in the US House of Representatives to adopt new versions of two laws originally drawn up to deal with the safety of youth online.

But the fear is that the bills introduced now – H.R.7891, the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), and H.R. 7890, the Children and Teens Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) 2.0 – will facilitate implementation of a future sweeping age verification and digital ID push.

These concerns are raised because KOSA is directing the secretary of commerce, together with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to conduct a study “evaluating the most technologically feasible methods and options for developing systems to verify age at the device or operating system level.”

At this stage of the proceedings, the study will not be used to mandate that platforms implement “an age gating or age verification functionality” – however, once the authorities have at their disposal the technical solutions to do it, some observers expect it could be used for a more aggressive legislative push at the federal level later on.

The key difference between the existing Senate version of KOSA and the proposed House bill is found under the “care of duty” component, with the House text now defining that to apply to “high impact online companies” with $2.5 billion or more annual revenue, and 150+ million global monthly active users over at least three months of the preceding year.

The Senate version refers to platforms “reasonably likely to be used by a minor” (employing 500 or more people, with gross annual revenue of $50 million or more).

Keep reading