Tag: police state

Italian Police in Schools: Hunt for Lists of Unvaccinated Kids

Starting on the first day of school, carabinieri will enter preschools and elementary schools in northern Palermo to identify pupils who are not up to date with mandatory vaccinations. Officers will obtain enrollment lists and, together with the schools and the ASP (Azienda Sanitaria Provinciale, or Provincial Health Authority), verify the children’s health status. The intervention, described as “extremely urgent,” was ordered by the minors’ prosecutor Claudia Caramanna following the death of Anna Rosa Bartolotta, the four-year-old unvaccinated child who was given a diagnosis of diphtheria. Before all aspects of the case have been clarified, the tragedy has become the pretext for launching an emergency operation.

The operation will begin on September 15, the date set by the Sicilian Region for the start of classes. Enrolled students are registered on the ministerial Sidi portal; schools transmit the lists to the ASP, and the health authority cross-checks them against the vaccination registry, returning the names of those not in compliance. Attention will initially focus on northern Palermo, but the ASP holds data for the entire metropolitan area. Also under scrutiny by the prosecutor’s office is a system used by some families to delay compliance: submitting an appointment booking, not having the child vaccinated, and then repeating the procedure later. “It may work at preschool, but in first grade the checks are strict,” explained Giusto Catania, principal of the Giuliana Saladino comprehensive institute. The Lorenzin law stipulates that compliance with vaccination requirements is a condition for access to nurseries and preschools; from age six onward, the pupil may attend classes, while parents face administrative fines ranging from €100 to €500 (approximately $110 to $550). If forms of “serious negligence” are established, such as failure to undergo pediatric check-ups, the consequences could extend as far as loss of parental custody. The checks, therefore, will not concern only the regularity of vaccination certificates but will also serve to identify possible situations of “health abandonment.”

The climate that developed during the pandemic thus seems to be reemerging, this time in school classrooms, through procedures that also find full support from part of the press. La Repubblica, for example, presents the initiative using a formula that closely echoes the language of the Covid emergency: “A virtuous machine has been set in motion to counter no-vax conspiracy theories in the protection of public health.” Giovanna Perricone, the regional ombudsman for children and adolescents, speaks of a “comprehensive and strategic operation”: from the checks, she explains, may follow reports on parents, fines, and the taking into care of families. Since “we cannot close social media,” she adds, it would also be necessary to counter their influence by disseminating messages on vaccines in a widespread manner, even through videos projected in supermarkets. The goal, in short, goes beyond verifying compliance with the law: it is about policing public space, re-educating parents so as to crack “conspiracy ideas.”

The Palermo case thus reproduces the polarization mechanism already tested during the pandemic. Diverse situations are folded into the undifferentiated category of “no-vax conspiracy theories.” Beyond the specific incident, the label allows attention to shift from the merits of individual cases to the alleged irresponsibility of families and to present as necessary an operation involving schools, the ASP, the prosecutor’s office, and law enforcement. Anna Rosa’s death has become the starting point for blanket checks and a cultural campaign extended even to supermarkets. The entry of carabinieri into schools is thus normalized as a tool of health protection, while the invocation of “conspiracy theories” once again serves to preemptively neutralize doubts and possible objections regarding the proportionality of the measures adopted.

Keep reading

Freedom Is Much More Important Than Democracy

Democracy invites despotism. When understood as majority rule, democracy means that fifty-one of every hundred citizens can have their way with the other forty-nine.

“But I want to keep my possessions, weapons, and children.” Too bad, the majority have decided to redistribute your property to those lazy bums over there, disarm you before you can do anything about it, and indoctrinate your children in public schools, so that they learn to resent you and love the State.

Democracy is dangerous without guardrails. Unless a society has a strong sense of moral virtue that fosters personal discipline, duty, and honor, base selfishness becomes the driving motivation behind all political action. Unless certain constitutional protections exist to safeguard each individual’s inviolable rights, democratic majorities devour those rights whenever expedient.

This should surprise no-one. Political philosophers such as Hobbes and Locke described humans’ pre-government “state of nature” as a chaotic, violent clash of self-interest. Adam Smith’s “invisible hand” regards self-interest as the engine of free markets. Consequently, it is easy to understand why forms of democracy that are unshackled from both moral and constitutional restraints prompt a society to descend back into a state of nature in which humanity’s worst impulses are again indulged.

When Western leaders speak adoringly of “our democracy,” citizens should prepare to guard their freedoms. My goodness, there is nothing inherently virtuous about democracy. North Korea’s Kim Jong Un runs the most repressive regime on the planet, but his country is known officially as the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea! China’s Xi Jinping is the general secretary of the oppressive Chinese Communist Party, but his nation remains officially the People’s Republic of China! Dictatorships around the globe claim to govern in the name of the people.

One might think that the blurry line between democracy and despotism would make Western leaders wary of singing democracy’s praises. Defenses of majoritarianism embrace the notion that the votes of a hundred people will lead to a more prudent outcome than we could reasonably expect from the decision-making of a single person. But that doesn’t make any sense. Would you rather live in a kingdom with a benevolent king or in a democracy filled with rapists, thieves, and murderers? If there is a 50/50 chance that any single dictator is good or bad, would there not be a 50/50 chance that a majority of citizens are good or bad, too? If one communist would take everything you have, wouldn’t fifty communists do the same thing? Democracy is a coin toss. It is the veneer of legitimacy that makes authoritarianism look shiny and sparkly. That hardly feels like something worth celebrating.

Democracy is just a process. It shouldn’t be idolized for its own sake. It can lead to just or unjust outcomes depending upon the moral virtue, shared culture, and general wisdom of the voters. Aside from these cultural attributes of a society, there is nothing more essential to a nation’s long-term peace and happiness than the recognition of and protections for inviolable, natural, God-given rights.

Freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of association, the right to self-defense – these rights and other natural liberties do not come into existence because of majority rule. Our natural rights exist despite majority rule. As the Founding Fathers articulated in the Declaration of Independence, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” We aren’t equal because of democracy; we are equal despite any democratic vote that might claim otherwise. Our lives, personal liberties, and connections to God exist because of His will, not the government’s.

The idea that rights and liberties exist separately from the promulgations of government forms the foundation of our constitutional system and, more generally, of human rights.

The U.S. Constitution spells out quite succinctly what powers each of the three branches of government – Legislative, Executive, and Judicial – shall have. From where do our three branches of government get these powers? The Preamble to the Constitution lays out the source of government power plainly: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” In other words, the government’s legitimacy comes directly from the people.

Every power that one of the three branches exercises is a power that arises from and is borrowed from the individual citizens of the United States. Any power not specifically delegated to the U.S. government remains with either the individual state governments or individual American citizens. This is profoundly important. The Constitution is not a document that empowers the federal government to do whatever it wants. It is a document that says, “You get to do only these discrete things. Everything else is off-limits!”

Keep reading

Popular Egyptian Show Host Sentenced to Death by Hanging Over Drug Trafficking Gang Involvement

A Cairo criminal court sentenced television host Sarah Khalifa, 39, and 11 other defendants to death by hanging on Saturday after convicting them of forming an organized gang that imported materials used to manufacture synthetic drugs for trafficking.

Khalifa has more than two million followers on social media.

Nine co-defendants received life sentences. Seven of the 28 people charged were acquitted.

State newspaper Al-Ahram said the death sentences were unanimous and issued after Egypt’s Grand Mufti gave the opinion required by law.

Prosecutors said more than 750 kilograms of narcotics and materials were seized.

They cited statements from 20 witnesses and electronic evidence including messages, photos, and video.

Khalifa was arrested in Cairo in April 2025. She has denied the drug charges and shouted that she was innocent when the verdict was read.

Al Jazeera reports:

Khalifa denied the charges and told investigators she had “never smoked a cigarette in my life” and declared her innocence.

Egyptian media reported that she was weeping and crying during the session, asking the court for mercy: “Please listen to me, sir. My parents raised me well; they are people who pray, and I don’t need drug money”

Prosecutors said the gang imported raw materials from abroad to manufacture synthetic drugs, storing them in residential properties. Members divided roles between procurement, manufacturing and distribution, authorities said. Investigators seized unlicensed firearms and ammunition alongside the narcotics.

The prosecution said the group used a residential property to store the materials and manufacture the drugs.

Khalifa hosted the Al-Mehwar crime and security program Mission Impossible. She also operated a cosmetic clinic and an events company.

Her lawyers said they will appeal.

Keep reading

How Britain Tried To Rig the Trial of a Genocide Opponent – and Lost

The jury took just two hours. Tony Greenstein – Jewish socialist, anti-Zionist – had faced fourteen years under the Terrorism Act for three social media posts and a blog article opposing Israel’s genocide in Gaza. The Crown called it “inviting support for Hamas.” The jury called it something else.

Section 12 of the Terrorism Act makes it an offense to invite support for a proscribed organization. Greenstein’s reference to a “Gaza ghetto uprising”, it argued, amounted to support for Hamas. Three social media posts and a blog article. The bill the State was demanding for those words – fourteen years.

Judge Sarah Plaschkes repeatedly objected when Greenstein brought the wider historical-political context of Palestine/Israel into the courtroom – warning him against treating the proceedings as a political forum. When the closing speech came, Greenstein was by now so concerned about what might happen to his barrister that he decided to address the jury himself (no doubt considering what had happened to Barrister Rajiv Menon KC – more of whom later). For thirty minutes he examined the prosecution case and the context in which his posts had been written. The jury wasn’t asked to lay aside the offending words; instead, he guided the jurors in an articulate reading (see his address to the jury, here) in which the world in which they’d been written was made clear (full trial coverage at the Canary, here).

But this court was rigged and thus determined to keep all context out of the courtroom. Nevertheless, despite Judge Plaschkes’ hostile interruptions, Greenstein’s speech laid bare the realities the prosecution had no interest in facing: his opposition to Hamas evident in dozens of articles he’d penned and published on his platform over the years; and Israel’s genocide in Gaza after October 2023. He spelled out the difference between supporting Hamas and defending the right of Palestinians to resist Israeli oppression, and the obvious point that the posts in contention clearly did not express support for Hamas.

Greenstein recounted to the jury how his grandparents fled Poland before the War, and most of those left behind perished in Treblinka. To him, Greenstein told the jury, the Holocaust was not history, but inheritance. He invoked the story of the 1943 Warsaw Ghetto uprising as a parallel of Gaza: young Jewish men and women rising up against the SS with smuggled pistols against tanks, knowing it was hopeless yet choosing resistance anyway. October 7th was Gaza’s uprising. The judge objected.

Once Greenstein had finished speaking (to a round of applause from the public gallery), Judge Plaschkes addressed the court to say that she had considered referring Greenstein for contempt of court. She then dismissed his address as a “rambling speech delivered by an old man”. An extraordinary turn of phrase in a criminal trial in which Greenstein was about to find out whether he was to be sentenced to 14 years in prison.

Home Secretary Yvette Cooper added Palestine Action to the UK’s list of proscribed organizations in July 2025, under section 3 of the Terrorism Act 2000. But proscription criminalizes more than membership. Up to fourteen years in prison can follow under section 12, which makes it an offence to “invite support for a proscribed organization” or to “express an opinion or belief that is supportive of a proscribed organization…” That was the provision the Crown used to prosecute Tony Greenstein, and it applies right now to public expressions of support for Palestine Action. Serious concerns over freedom of expression and peaceful assembly were raised by a group of five UN Special Rapporteurs over proscribing a group for property destruction.

On 6 August 2024 activists from Palestine Action staged a break-in at Elbit Systems, in Filton, near Bristol.  It’s an Israeli defense company with British operations supplying equipment to the IDF. They entered facilities, sabotaged machinery and hindered production they regarded as part of Israel’s war-making infrastructure. During the parliamentary debate on the proscription order, it was argued that Palestine Action had targeted only industrial facilities, and not civilians. The government went ahead with proscription anyway.

Rajiv Menon KC represented one of the six defendants in the February 2026 Filton Trial. All six were acquitted of aggravated burglary but the jury failed to agree on criminal damage. At the May retrial, four were convicted. Menon’s closing speech was a masterclass and invoked the 1670 Bushell case – a landmark ruling on jury independence from judicial interference, arguing that the judge could not direct a conviction. Judge Jeremy Johnson then referred Menon for contempt, a referral the Court of Appeal overturned on procedural grounds in May before Johnson referred to it correctly in June.

The Filton defendants were acquitted of the most serious charge – the barrister who defended them is now facing contempt proceedings for the way he did it.

So what lies behind all this courtroom drama is a routine machinery. Proscription – the government’s designation of an organization as terrorist – takes effect by order of the Home Secretary. It falls to the barrister to gauge how far a closing speech can go before crossing the line into contempt, while the judge cautions against political argument. Indeed, the evidence shows that judges are increasingly directing what juries are allowed to hear before threatening barristers with contempt. To an outside observer there is little sign of a conflict – yet behind these routine procedures is something damning: what the jury doesn’t get to hear – could mean years in prison.

And, of course, the elephant in the room is that Britain is directly implicated in Israel’s genocide in Gaza. In September 2024, as the government suspended thirty arms export licenses to Israel, Foreign Secretary David Lammy told Parliament that “there exists a clear risk that they might be used to commit or facilitate a serious violation of international humanitarian law”. Thirty licenses suspended out of three hundred and fifty. Britain would also continue to supply F-35 components through the global parts pool serving Israel, with the government arguing that withdrawal would undermine allied security. British weapons armed a state committing a genocide despite their supposed withdrawal.

The state that arms Israel prosecutes those who oppose it.

The Crown had brought three posts, a blog article and an accusation of terrorism before the jury. But Greenstein stood on that essential context – despite the hostile judge’s interjections. And a mere two hours after retiring – the jurors returned with a unanimous verdict of not guilty.

Keep reading

Texas Police Used AI to Write Report About Using Flock to Search for Woman Who Had Abortion

The Texas sheriff’s office that used Flock to search more than 80,000 cameras nationwide for a woman who had a self-administered abortion used Axon’s Draft One AI tool to help write a police report about the incident, documents shared with 404 Media show. The tool was used in part to summarize a discussion of “the legal implications of the situation.”

404 Media first reported on the incident in May 2025 in which the Johnson County Sheriff’s Office in Texas searched Flock’s nationwide network for the whereabouts of a woman who self-administered an abortion, highlighting the threat of this AI-powered surveillance system being used to criminalize or track women seeking reproductive healthcare. The use of both Flock and Axon’s Draft One, which uses audio from body camera footage to automatically draft police reports using artificial intelligence, shows how quickly police departments have come to use AI surveillance tools even in critically sensitive cases.

“I acknowledge this report was generated using Draft One by Axon,” a section of the report reads.

The abortion case has since become a flashpoint in the controversy over the use of Flock automated license plate reader (ALPR) cameras. Flock’s CEO, Garrett Langley, has repeatedly and erroneously suggested that 404 Media misreported the case and that the search was done only for the woman’s safety because her family was worried about her. 404 Media previously reported that the entire police investigation was done at the behest of the woman’s abusive partner and that police discussed whether they were allowed to charge her with a crime: “It was discussed at the time with the District Attorney’s office and learned the State could not statutorily charge [the woman] for taking the pill to cause the abortion,” a police report previously obtained by the Electronic Frontier Foundation and shared with 404 Media said. Concern from her family is never mentioned in that earlier police report or in the AI-generated police report used to write this article.

The AI-generated incident report was obtained by journalist Cameron Probert of the Tri-City Herald and shared with 404 Media. The report shows there is extensive body camera and audio evidence that would clarify what happened in the case, and that at least one police officer, sergeant Damien Bethel, used Draft One to write his report on the incident. Parts of a police incident report show that Draft One was used to summarize a discussion between police over “the legal implications of the situation” and other investigative aspects of the case. The Johnson County Sheriff’s Department has repeatedly refused to release body camera footage from the case, including in response to 404 Media’s public records requests.

“Deputies discussed the legal implications of the situation, noting that while the girlfriend self-administered the abortion pill, there were no criminal charges applicable under current Texas law,” Bethel’s report states, providing no more details about the specifics of the discussion. “Deputies also considered the possibility of a civil lawsuit against the pharmaceutical company that supplied the pill.”

Bethell’s Draft One report further states, “There is digital multi-media evidence from Body Worn Camera footage of this call for service in the AXON Evidence Library. There is digital multi-media evidence of In-Car Camera footage of this call for service in the AXON Evidence Library or the WatchGuard Evidence Library. There were digital images captured while on the scene.” The Johnson County Sheriff’s Department has thus far refused to release even redacted versions of this evidence that the EFF and 404 Media have separately requested.

Keep reading

Radical Maine Democrat Senate Nominee Wants the State to Seize Private Property from Mainers: “The State Should Be Able to Come In and Take These Places Over”

Far-left Maine U.S. Senate nominee Troy Jackson just told a crowd of mobile-home park residents that the government should be able to take private property when he doesn’t like who owns it.

At a Labor Day weekend campaign stop Saturday at Blueberry Ridge Mobile Village in Wells, Jackson said the state should step in and take over parks owned by out-of-state companies and private equity firms.

“I feel strongly that, if needed, the state should be able to come in, to take these places over,” Jackson told residents gathered in a backyard, according to the Portland Press Herald.

He added that the state should hold the sites until residents can take them over “so you don’t see these private equity (firms) coming in and making a killing on these parks.”

Video of Jackson’s remarks was circulated by RNC Research.

Keep reading

Welcome To Black Mirror: Pre-Crime AI, Shock Gloves, and Robot Dogs

We live in a world where much of our popular media is, to some extent, an extension of a pervasive propaganda apparatus rife with subliminal messages and predictive programming, inundating the populace with subconscious sensory overload effective for sedating the citizenry all too keen to live vicariously through the stories of fictional heroes fighting tyranny and oppression while doing nothing to emulate those actions in the real world.

All the while, the real world is beginning to resemble more and more of a fictional dystopia; Orwell’s 1984, Hunger Games, Black Mirror, take your pick.

It’s no secret that the second Trump administration is working to build what can only be described as a fascist police state upon the foundations of decades of Constitutional erosion, and encroachment of police militarization on everyday life built up by previous administrations both Republican and Democrat alike.

And as technology continues to advance, accelerating in tandem with the implementation of technocracy, the tools of this tyranny only become more sinister.

Previously, The Free Thought Project has reported extensively on the numerous abuses and Gestapo tactics of agencies such as the Department of Homeland Security and it’s more militant subordinates such as ICE running rampant through America’s streets.

Our continuing series on ICE abuses has already thoroughly documented the unprecedented wave of violence committed by ICE officers throughout the country, ranging from mass detentions of American citizens without due process, to rampant physical abuse, inhumane treatment within detention centers, and on occasion summary executions of dissenters in the streets.

Despite the immense pushback, the state sanctioned terrorist organization and the despotic regime behind it is only doubling down on its heavy handed tactics of repression.

As we have reported previously, the efforts taken by the Trump administration to erect an all encompassing mass surveillance panopticon are expanding by leaps and bounds. This includes but is not limited to: the integration of artificial intelligence pre-crime algorithms used to flag citizens as potential threats before they commit any wrongdoing; autonomous police surveillance drones; facial recognition technology which has a history of inaccurate identifications; the implementation of flock cameras nationwide with its own growing epidemic of misidentification and false arrest; and a slew of domestic spying operations targeting political dissidents.

All of this is compounded with the rising implementation of even more secretive Axon cameras, while the administration works to build the standing army for a domestic occupation by normalizing the presence of US troops on American streets.

Even more recently, The Free Thought Project has reported that the latest tool of forced compliance in the arsenal of Immigration and Customs Enforcement comes in the form of electric shock gloves, using electrocution as yet another form of violence to keep the unruly citizenry in line.

Keep reading

Missouri Rep. Burlison TEARS INTO The Surveillance State – Should Flock Cameras Be Abolished? Is China Spying On Us Through Our Cell Phones?

Rep. Eric Burlison, R-MO, blasted the Surveillance State that exists within our federal government, an ongoing debate that has existed for decades.

Following the devastating 9/11 attacks just 25 years ago, the U.S. government has ramped up efforts to spy on it’s own citizens, with most common argument in favor of this is being  that it keeps the American People safe and prevents something like 9/11 from ever happening again.

In 2026 new debates surrounding the use of flock cameras and their expansion have raised concerns that this violates our 4th amendment rights to privacy, while supporters continue to argue that it ensures public safety.

Flock camera across the country are being sabotaged in response to their expansion.

Burlison and Rep. Thomas Massie, R-KY, introduced a bill known as the “Flock-Off Act,” which would cut off federal funding for flock camera expansion and address the growing concerns in the American public over their usage.

The bill has six additional cosponsors.

Keep reading

SHOCKER: Democrat-Run Danbury Votes to Put Non-Citizens in Police Uniforms After ICE Raids — Mayor Who Grew Up Illegal Cheers the Move

While federal agents were still rounding up illegal aliens in western Connecticut, the Democrat-dominated Danbury City Council voted 18-2 to let non-citizens pin on a badge and police American citizens.

The ordinance, approved Tuesday night, opens Danbury Police Department hiring to lawful permanent residents and DACA recipients, so-called “Dreamers” who were brought here illegally as children and remain in the country under an Obama-era executive program that Congress never made law.

All 17 Democrats on the council supported the ordinance, along with one Republican. The only two opposing votes came from Republicans, according to Fox News.

Police Chief Patrick Ridenhour similarly argued that applicants will still be required to undergo background checks, psychological evaluations, medical and drug screenings, polygraph examinations, training, and civil-service testing, according to Patch.

But critics say the dispute is not merely about testing standards. It is about whether the extraordinary government power to carry a firearm, detain people, and arrest American citizens should be entrusted to someone who has not obtained American citizenship.

Councilwoman Candace Fay attempted to force separate votes on permanent residents and DACA recipients, but her motion was rejected. Fay reportedly warned that DACA protection is temporary and could be withdrawn, potentially leaving taxpayers responsible for training an officer who later becomes ineligible to remain in the country.

Democrat Councilman Joe Britton said the quiet part out loud. The vote, he declared, “sends a message to our immigrant community at large that you are welcome in Danbury.” He added that once the uniform goes on, background “doesn’t matter.”

Keep reading

Authoritarianism Rises as Government Fear Losing Power

All Republics eventually turn against their citizens when they begin to see their power slipping away through their fingers. Today in Europe, free speech has vanished. In the US, you see “See Something, Say Something.” Looking at history, we see this same pattern. Perhaps the most famous example was the Venetian Republic, which eventually destroyed its own power.

The practice of encouraging citizens to report others was instituted by Maximinus I (236-248AD) who tore Rome apart declaring all wealth belonged to the state and paid rewards to people who reported others. Once he turned everyone against each other, there was no going back. The economy began to implode as trust and unity evaporated. The wealthy began to hoard their wealth instead of investing and lending it out. Capitalism requires wealth disparity for then the wealthy put their money to use in venture type arrangements that even took place in ancient Athens, which was the birth of insurance underwriting voyages for trade. Maximinus I destroyed that unity and venture capital virtually ceased to exist after him.

Keep reading