Tag: police state

Germany’s War on Satire: AfD MP Fined €11,250 for Meme While Leftist Magazine Is Celebrated After It Depicts Trump Giving Hitler Salute

Germany is no longer a democracy — it’s a warning. A German court has just fined AfD lawmaker Petr Bystron €11,250 for sharing a satirical meme online, while the country’s liberal establishment laughs as one of its biggest magazines once showed President Donald Trump giving the Hitler salute on its cover with the headline “Sein Kampf” (“His Struggle”).

That cover made international headlines in 2017. No prosecutor, no police, no criminal charge. It was called “art.”

But when Bystron — a conservative member of parliament — posted a meme mocking Ukraine’s former ambassador Andrij Melnyk, who had publicly defended a Nazi collaborator, the German justice system came crashing down on him.

Mock a Nazi Apologist? Get Convicted in Germany.

The meme, published in July 2022, showed German politicians “waving goodbye” to Melnyk after his recall from Berlin. Prosecutors said the waves looked like “Hitler salutes.” You can’t make this up.

Bystron’s real “crime”? Daring to expose hypocrisy in a system that protects globalists and punishes dissent.

Melnyk, the Ukrainian diplomat at the center of it all, had told a German interviewer that Stepan Bandera, a Nazi collaborator responsible for mass killings of Jews and Poles, was “no mass murderer.” That statement caused outrage in Poland and Israel — but in Germany’s woke establishment? Nothing. Melnyk stayed a hero. He was later promoted by Volodymyr Zelensky to Deputy Foreign Minister.

Bystron mocked that insanity — and Germany called him the extremist.

Keep reading

On the Precipice of Authoritarian Rule

Earlier this month, President Donald Trump threatened to unleash the armed forces on more American cities during a rambling address to top military brass. He told the hundreds of generals and admirals gathered to hear him that some of them would be called upon to take a primary role at a time when his administration has launched occupations of American cities, deployed tens of thousands of troops across the United States, created a framework for targeting domestic enemies, cast his political rivals as subhuman, and asserted his right to wage secret war and summarily execute those he deems terrorists.

Trump used that bizarre speech to take aim at cities he claimed “are run by the radical left Democrats,” including Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, and San Francisco. “We’re going to straighten them out one by one. And this is going to be a major part for some of the people in this room,” he said. “That’s a war too. It’s a war from within.” He then added: “We should use some of these dangerous cities as training grounds for our military.”

Trump has, of course, already deployed the armed forces inside the United States in an unprecedented fashion during the first year of his second term in office. As September began, a federal judge found that his decision to occupy Los Angeles with members of California’s National Guard — under so-called Title 10 or federalized status — against the wishes of California Governor Gavin Newsom was illegal. But just weeks later, Trump followed up by ordering the military occupation of Portland, Oregon, over Governor Tina Kotek’s objections.

“I am directing Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, to provide all necessary Troops to protect War ravaged Portland and any of our ICE Facilities under siege from attack by Antifa, and other domestic terrorists,” Trump wrote on Truth Social late last month. And he “authoriz[ed] Full Force, if necessary.”

When a different federal judge blocked him from deploying Oregon National Guardsmen to the city, he ordered in Guard members from California and Texas. That judge then promptly blocked his effort to circumvent her order, citing the lack of a legal basis for sending troops into Portland. In response, Trump threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act — an 1807 law that grants the president emergency powers to deploy troops on U.S. soil — to “get around” the court rulings blocking his military occupation efforts. “I think that’s all insurrection, really criminal insurrection,” he claimed, in confused remarks from the Oval Office.

Experts say that his increasing use of the armed forces within the United States represents an extraordinary violation of the Posse Comitatus Act. That bedrock nineteenth-century law banning the use of federal troops to execute domestic law enforcement has long been seen as fundamental to America’s democratic tradition. However, the president’s deployments continue to nudge this country ever closer to becoming a genuine police state. They come amid a raft of other Trump administration authoritarian measures designed to undermine the Constitution and weaken democracy. Those include attacks on birthright citizenship and free speech, as well as the exercise of expansive unilateral powers like deporting people without due process and rolling back energy regulations, citing wartime and emergency powers.

Keep reading

Alert: Spanish Priest Facing Years in Prison for Comment That Offended Muslims

If you pay any attention to American ideological discourse, you’ve no doubt heard the one about “Christian nationalism.”

It’s this bogeyman idea that Christians are trying to take over the world politically, culturally, and spiritually (as if that’s a bad thing).

For anyone paying attention to the world, however, you’re no doubt aware of just how perilous — and powerless — life is for Christians outside of America’s protection.

Father Custodio Ballester, a Catholic priest in Spain, is facing the possibility of very real prison time on charges of “Islamaphobia,” according to a harrowing report from The Christian Broadcasting Network.

Ballester is facing up to three years in prison for this charge, as well as fines.

The big crime? Answering a question about the possibility of an interfaith dialogue between Christians and Muslims.

(It can’t be stressed enough that this happened in 2016, nearly a full decade ago.)

“This renewed revival of Christian-Muslim dialogue, paralyzed by the alleged ‘imprudence’ of the beloved Benedict XVI, is far from a reality,” Ballester wrote in a letter, responding to the question. “Islam does not allow for dialogue. You either believe or you are an infidel who must be subdued one way or another.”

The Christian Broadcasting Network added: “In a 2017 YouTube video, Ballester expanded on his 2016 remarks, warning that Islam not only poses a threat in Europe, but also that in many Muslim-majority countries, Christians face persecution.”

Despite the rote — and fairly accurate — description of Islamic culture, Ballester incensed the Association of Spanish Muslims Against Islamophobia.

Keep reading

‘Inactive’ Chicago Cop Sentenced To 20 Years In Prison For Sexual Abuse Of Minors

An “inactive” Chicago police officer has been sentenced to 20 years in prison after pleading guilty to charges that he sexually abused minors, the Cook County Sheriff’s Office announced.

David Deleon, 32, pled guilty Friday to one count of criminal sexual abuse and two counts of aggravated criminal sexual abuse of victims under 18, Sheriff Tom Dart’s office announced. He was sentenced to 20 years in prison in the guilty plea.

Deleon’s conviction comes after his arrest in 2023, when officers with northwest suburb Norridge’s police department charged him with aggravated criminal sexual abuse of a minor. Norridge police seized Deleon’s phone, which included evidence that he sexually assaulted and abused minors and recorded lewd videos of himself with minors, according to the sheriff’s office.

Norridge police turned the evidence over to Chicago police, who forwarded it to the sheriff’s Internet Crimes Against Children unit.

Investigators found Deleon, who lived in Edison Park, met his victims while working as a Chicago police officer and would invite them to sleep at his home, the sheriff’s office said.

Deleon was charged in August 2023 with criminal sexual abuse and assault as well as two counts of manufacturing child pornography, two counts of possession of child pornography and one count of unauthorized videotaping, the sheriff’s office announced at the time.

Deleon agreed to plead guilty to the sexual abuse and assault charges in exchange for prosecutors dropping the other charges, according to the Tribune. He has been in jail since his August 2023 arrest.

Deleon was stripped of his police powers following the 2023 charges, according to the sheriff’s office. He is considered an “inactive” employee with the Chicago Police Department, a spokesperson said.

Keep reading

Australia Advances National Facial Recognition Network Despite Privacy Concerns

Australia is moving forward with a national facial recognition network that will link millions of citizens’ identity documents, despite ongoing uncertainty about privacy safeguards.

The National Driver Licence Facial Recognition Solution (NDLFRS) will merge biometric data from driver’s licenses and passports so that both government departments and private businesses can verify individuals’ identities.

The proposal dates back eight years but has recently accelerated. The Digital Transformation Agency confirmed that the Department of Home Affairs will host the system, while each state and territory will continue to manage its own data.

The agency stated that the project aims “to protect Australian people from identity theft, to manage and prevent crime, to increase road safety and to improve identity verification.”

It also noted that “Tasmania, Victoria and South Australia have provided data to the NDLFRS, with other states and territories to follow.”

Although the initiative remains marked as “unendorsed,” the government is preparing to activate key components.

The Attorney-General’s Department has announced that the accompanying Face Verification Service (FVS), which checks whether a person’s facial image matches the photo held in official records, is expected to begin operation in 2025.

Keep reading

Canada Bill Sponsor Says Age Verification, Blocking Powers, Could Apply to Any Site, Even Social Media

A new Canadian Senate proposal on age verification has raised serious questions about the future of free expression and online access.

The bill’s sponsor has confirmed that the government would have the authority to decide which websites fall under its control, including platforms that have nothing to do with pornography.

Senator Julie Miville-Dechêne, who introduced Bill S-209, told a Senate committee that enforcement would ultimately be at the discretion of the federal government. “The government will decide on the scope, so the government could decide to include social media like X in its choices,” she said.

That statement cuts to the core of the controversy. The Protecting Young Persons from Exposure to Pornography Act was introduced as a measure aimed at sites that make adult content available for commercial purposes.

Yet, according to its sponsor, the government could extend it to any platform where some form of explicit content can be found, even if it is incidental or user-generated.

Bill S-209 completed its second reading in the Senate on June 12, 2025, and is now under committee review, which last met on October 9.

If passed, it would empower the government to impose mandatory age ID verification requirements across a wide range of online services. Those who fail to comply could face court-ordered blocking by Canadian internet service providers.

Although the proposal is framed as protecting minors, its broad wording leaves the door open for the government to demand compliance from social media companies, search engines, or discussion forums where adult material may appear in isolated cases.

Under Section 12, the Cabinet is granted full regulatory authority to determine which sites are covered and to set the rules for verification technologies.

Keep reading

Canada’s AG Claims Anti-“Hate” Law Isn’t About Censorship

Governments around the world have a long history of introducing laws that restrict speech while insisting they are not acts of censorship.

Each new proposal is framed as a measure to promote safety, combat misinformation, or protect vulnerable communities, yet the result is often the same: expanded state authority over what citizens can say or share.

Now Canada’s Attorney General Sean Fraser is attempting to reassure Canadians that the federal government’s new hate speech legislation, Bill C-9, is not a disguised attempt to police online expression.

The proposal, already facing strong opposition from free expression advocates, introduces new “hate-related” offenses and expands police powers over what is labeled “hatred” in the Criminal Code.

Fraser told MPs that the government is not seeking to criminalize internet activity that is currently legal.

“We should recognize there are many acts we may find offensive that do not constitute hate for the purpose of the Criminal Code,” he said during his appearance before the Commons justice committee.

He insisted the bill’s purpose is not censorship, even as he confirmed that its provisions would apply equally to speech on the internet and in public spaces.

The legislation, officially titled An Act To Amend The Criminal Code (Combatting Hate Act), also bans the display of Nazi and Hamas symbols that are deemed to promote hatred, makes it an offense to obstruct religious or cultural ceremonies, and rewrites how “hatred” is defined.

The bill frames it as “the emotion that involves detestation or vilification and that is stronger than disdain or dislike.”

Free speech advocates have warned that this rewording lowers the legal bar by abandoning the Supreme Court’s requirement that hatred must be “an emotion of an intense and extreme nature.”

Fraser responded that any online statement would only be subject to prosecution if it already met the threshold for hate propaganda under existing law. “The only circumstance where you could imagine some online comment attracting scrutiny under this law would attach to behavior that is criminal today but is punished less severely,” he told the committee.

Keep reading

Mom Placed on Child Abuse Registry for Letting 13-Year-Old Babysit

When single mom of two and home health aide Alice (a pseudonym) needed to run a brief errand, she tasked her 13-year-old brother (whom she is also the caretaker for) with babysitting her nearly 1-year-old child. For this, she was placed on the state’s child abuse registry.

Mariel Mussack, an attorney with Community Legal Services, told Alice’s story during testimony before the Pennsylvania House Children and Youth Committee in favor of H.B. 1873—known as Reasonable Independence for Children—on October 6. Similar bills have been passed in 11 states to date, clarifying that neglect is when a parent puts their child in obvious, serious danger, not anytime they simply take their eyes off of them. 

As in most of the other states, the Pennsylvania bill has bipartisan sponsors: Rep. Jeanne McNeill (D–Whitehall), who is majority chair of the committee, Rep. Rick Krajewski (D–Philadelphia), and Rep. David Zimmerman (R–Reinholds). Krajewski opened the hearing by noting that he’d grown up with a single mom who worked two or three jobs, and therefore, he had to get himself to school and help care for his younger sister. “It really does chill me to think that, in the eyes of our state statutes, that could be seen as neglect,” Krajewski said. 

Zimmerman recalled growing up on a farm. “We’d be gone all day,” he said. “And we really would look out for each other.” 

Peter Gray, a research professor of developmental psychology at Boston College and a co-founder with me of Let Grow, a nonprofit fighting for childhood independence, testified that an independent childhood helps inoculate kids against despair. 

“Over the last 60 years, we’ve seen a gradual but overall huge decline in children’s opportunities to play, roam, and generally engage in activities independent of adults,” Gray said, adding that “we’ve seen a gradual but overall huge increase in anxiety, depression, and…suicide among young people.” 

That’s due to a shrinking “internal locus of control,” the sense that you can handle things alone, said Gray. The way you build a robust internal locus of control is by being trusted to decide some things for yourself, like how to spend your time, and what you can handle on your own. “But,” Gray said, “we’re not allowing [kids] to do that.”

As constant adult supervision becomes the norm, more and more kids are being reported to the authorities. Diane Redleaf, a civil rights lawyer and Let Grow’s legal consultant, says that 37 percent of American children will be the subject of a hotline call—that number soars to 53 percent for African-American children.

Keep reading

Texas Is Sued Over Digital ID Age Verification Bill

A major technology association is suing the State of Texas over a new law that threatens both privacy and free expression.

The Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) has filed a federal lawsuit challenging Senate Bill 2420, which is set to take effect on January 1, 2026.

We obtained a copy of the lawsuit for you here.

The group argues that the law forces both app stores and developers to impose invasive ID age checks, obtain parental consent, and label content in state-approved ways that violate the First Amendment.

Under SB 2420, anyone with an app store account would need to complete an age-verification process before downloading or updating applications.

If an app store determines that a user is under 18, that user would be blocked from downloading most apps or making in-app purchases unless a parent gives consent and assumes control of the account.

Minors who cannot link their profiles to a parent or guardian would lose access to app store content entirely.

App developers would also face new rules.

They must classify their apps into multiple age categories and provide written explanations for each rating. Every update, feature addition, or design change would require written notice to the app store.

CCIA says these mandates compel developers to describe their products in ways dictated by the state and pressure companies to collect personal data that users should not have to disclose.

Keep reading

FDR’s “Four Policemen”: The Globalist Blueprint for Endless War and American Subjugation

It is time to expose the truth about Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s so-called Four Policemen plan — a sinister scheme concocted by the globalist cabal surrounding the 32nd president to permanently shackle the United States to a role of international enforcer in a world government order. Far from being a noble vision for peace, FDR’s “Four Policemen” was the original blueprint for what would become the United Nations — an unelected, unaccountable body of internationalists dedicated not to liberty, but to global control.

In the midst of the Second World War, even before the guns fell silent, Roosevelt and his cadre of globalist advisors — including Soviet sympathizers such as Alger Hiss — were laying the foundation for a postwar “New World Order.” The heart of this plan was what FDR euphemistically called the “Four Policemen”: the United States, Great Britain, the Soviet Union, and China. These four powers, according to Roosevelt, would act as the guardians of peace, responsible for policing the globe and suppressing any acts of aggression through military might.

Let that sink in: Roosevelt — hailed by modern progressives as a champion of democracy — openly proposed that a small clique of global superpowers should wield exclusive authority to intervene in the affairs of nations, impose sanctions, deploy military force, and determine which conflicts were worthy of attention. Sovereignty? An outdated relic. Consent of the governed? Irrelevant. In FDR’s globalist gospel, only the self-anointed “policemen” mattered.

Keep reading