Tag: police state

The Tyranny Of Compelled Speech

While censorship is often the main focus of discussions about free speech, there’s a related phenomenon that can do just as much damage to a free society. Not by preventing people from saying things they believe in, but by forcing them to say things they do not.

Compelled speech requires people to use certain words or phrases, or to partake in upholding certain ideological beliefs. It is just as dangerous to free expression as overt censorship.

The constant recitation of indigenous “land acknowledgements” illustrates Canada’s shift towards enforced mass-compliance on complicated social issues. These statements have become ubiquitous in Canadian public life: at schools, workplaces, government functions, ceremonies, and sporting events. Institutions display them on websites, documents, email signatures, and social media. A busy person in Canada may come across dozens of land acknowledgements per day in various contexts.

Although framed as optional gestures of respect, many organizations now have policies mandating land acknowledgements; in other circumstances, social pressure can make them seem obligatory even if they’re not.

Land acknowledgements have morphed well beyond a simple sharing of history into something much more problematic: they have become a sort of sacred ritual with near-spiritual implications, tying certain ethnic groups to ownership over nature itself. When unpacked, there is a lot being said between the lines.

Stepping out of line on land acknowledgements can set off a variety of hostile reactions, ranging from social condemnation to significant legal consequences. Geoffrey Horsman is a biochemistry professor at Wilfrid Laurier University in Waterloo, Ont. As a parent of three children in the local school system and a member of his local school’s parent council, he noted the growing politicization of the regional school system. Of particular concern was the practice of opening every meeting with a land acknowledgement, which took up valuable time and reinforced what he considers a divisive premise.

“I don’t think there is anything good that can come out of the idea that a certain ethnic group are the true inheritors of this land,” Horsman said in an interview. But when he raised his objections about the practice, he encountered immediate resistance. In a series of meetings with Waterloo Region District School Board staff, he was told that even discussing the issue was off the table. He has since brought a legal case against the board.

Catherine Kronas, the mother of a student attending Ancaster High Secondary School in Hamilton, Ont., actually lost her position as an elected member of her school council last year after she politely disagreed with land statements being read out loud before meetings. “School councils should decide what gets said in their meetings, and we shouldn’t have to recite something mandated by the government,” she told me. Kronas was reinstated only after threatening legal action.

Horsman’s and Kronas’s cases are both about indigenous land acknowledgements, but the issues they raise run deeper. They could have been challenging any form of imposed ideological speech. In fact, many Canadian governments and institutions are developing a worrying track record of legally enforcing ideological language on a number of topics

Keep reading

POWDER KEG EUROPE: German Men Now Have to Ask the Army for Permission to Leave the Country for More Than Three Months

German fighting-age males are getting an early taste of the military escalation on the old continent.

We have been reporting here on TGP how the Euro-Globalist ‘leaders’ in Europe have been pushing their countries through a military buildup not seen since the end of the Cold War.

But it did take us by surprise just how fast Germany escalated their military service rules into draconian demands.

It has now been reported that German men ‘of fighting age’ must now ask the Bundeswehr for permission to leave the country for more than three months.

The Telegraph reported:

“The government has introduced a new military service scheme this year that stops short of conscription but requires men born from 2008 onwards to take a medical exam and fill in a survey about their fitness for service.

It has emerged that a clause in the law also requires men aged between 17 and 45 to obtain a permit from the Bundeswehr, the German armed forces, before leaving the country for extended periods.”

Keep reading

Americans Traveling to Hong Kong Will Now Face ARREST for Refusing to Hand Over Phones, Laptops, and Passwords

The era of privacy is officially over in the “New Hong Kong,” and if you’re an American traveling abroad, you are now a target for the Communist-controlled regime.

According to a recent warning issued by the U.S. Consulate, Americans entering or even transiting through Hong Kong could now face criminal charges simply for refusing to unlock their phones or provide passwords to authorities.

Under newly updated enforcement rules tied to Hong Kong’s sweeping National Security Law, police now have the authority to demand access to personal electronic devices, including phones and laptops, on the spot.

And here’s the catch:

This applies to everyone, residents, tourists, business travelers, and even passengers just passing through the airport.

The U.S. Consulate General in Hong Kong and Macao issued the following alert:

On March 23, 2026, the Hong Kong government changed the implementing rules relating to the National Security Law. It is now a criminal offense to refuse to give the Hong Kong police the passwords or decryption assistance to access all personal electronic devices including cellphones and laptops. This legal change applies to everyone, including U.S. citizens, in Hong Kong, arriving or just transiting Hong Kong International Airport. In addition, the Hong Kong government also has more authority to take and keep any personal devices, as evidence, that they claim are linked to national security offenses.

Keep reading

Maine Lobsterman Asks the Supreme Court To Strike Down a Rule Allowing the Government To Track His Boat 24/7

In March 2022, a rule was finalized requiring all federally permitted lobster vessels in 10 East Coast states to install GPS tracking. Now one lobsterman is asking the Supreme Court to overturn the regulation.

Last week, Frank Thompson, a fifth-generation Maine lobsterman, filed a petition to the Supreme Court challenging a rule set by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC). This rule required lobstermen to install a GPS device on their boats, which tracks and sends locations on a minute-by-minute basis to government agencies—even when the boat is being used recreationally. The systems—which are Bluetooth compatible and can collect audio—also record and update the boat’s location every six hours when it is docked or moored. Failing to comply with the rule could lead to fines, forfeiture of fishing licenses, jail time, and even a federal moratorium on lobstering in noncompliant states.

The rule was pitched as a way to save lobstermen time. Rather than using written logs, the GPS device would automatically track their day. It was also proposed to better track and reduce the environmental impact of the industry. However, these fishermen are already ecologically conscious because their livelihood depends on it. The industry has received praise from the state’s fishing commissioner for being a “model of conservation.”

Whatever the motivation, fishermen say the rule violates their constitutional rights. In 2024, Thompson challenged the regulation in federal court, arguing that it violated his Fourth Amendment right to protection against unreasonable search and seizure. Both the district court and appeals court sided with the government, saying that since lobstering was considered a “closely regulated” industry, it did not enjoy the same constitutional protections from warrantless searches that less-regulated businesses enjoy.

But “digital surveillance without a warrant is unconstitutional—regardless of industry,” says the Pacific Legal Foundation (PLF), a public-interest law firm that is representing Thompson. “The government cannot exclude licensed professions from the Fourth Amendment’s protections and compel lobstermen to submit to government trespass and around-the-clock” federal surveillance.

Keep reading

Ohio Church Wins Homeless Ministry Legal Battle With City

A Bryan, Ohio, church may continue its 24-hour homeless ministry after a legal battle over fire code enforcement, a judge ruled on April 1.

Judge James D. Bates of the Williams County Court of Common Pleas dismissed the city’s lawsuit against Dad’s Place church with prejudice, ending civil proceedings aimed at shutting down the church’s overnight shelter ministry.

The ruling allows Dad’s Place, led by Pastor Chris Avell, to continue operating its 24-hour ministry serving vulnerable individuals in Bryan.

Court records show the case stemmed from enforcement actions by Bryan Fire Chief Douglas Pool, who sought to halt the church’s overnight activities over fire code concerns.

“The Court, from the initial time it was appointed to the case, felt that it would have to find for the Fire Chief,” Bates wrote.

“Having applied strict scrutiny … the Court concedes that the Fire Chief’s enforcement of the fire code fails because it lacks a compelling interest and isn’t the least restrictive means of enforcing fire safety. The City has given waivers to other businesses like hotels, but has refused to give the church a similar accommodation. This is fatal under strict scrutiny. Therefore, a judgment in favor of Dad’s Place must be entered.”

Keep reading

Oregon’s Union Crackdown Spreads

The state of Oregon passed a law last year that should outrage every American who believes in the First Amendment.

Not because it bans speech outright. Not because it targets a newspaper or a broadcaster. Because it targets a letter. An email. A text message. A conversation telling public employees they have a constitutional right to opt out of their union.

That’s what Oregon made illegal.

The Freedom Foundation has been communicating with public employees for years. We do it because back in 2018 the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed in Janus v. AFSCME that every government employee has a constitutional right to decline union membership and dues — a right workers will never find out about if they’re waiting for their union to inform them of it.

Someone else, most likely the Freedom Foundation, has to do it for them.

Oregon’s HB 3789, which took effect Jan. 1, was written specifically to shut down our outreach activities in that state — and potentially others. Egged on by their union puppet masters, lawmakers in that state approved legislation threatening heavy financial penalties for what the law describes as impersonating a labor union.

Keep reading

Massachusetts Agrees to Delete Data From App It ‘Secretly Installed’ During Pandemic

Massachusetts officials have agreed to delete data from a contact tracing application that people said was installed on their phones without their permission during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Under a settlement agreement approved by a federal judge on March 31, the Massachusetts Department of Public Health “shall (a) destroy any Primary Data in the Department’s possession, custody, and control, which the Department, exercising all due diligence, has located and … that was made available to the Department from the COVID Exposure Notification Setting on Android Devices; and (b) certify in writing to Class Counsel that such data has been destroyed and will not be provided to any third party.”

The state’s health commissioner also promised not to have data collecting applications installed on people’s phones without their permission for five years.

The settlement came in a case brought by plaintiffs who said the app in question, known as MassNotify v.3 or Exposure Notification Settings Feature-MA, was “secretly installed” on their phones without their permission.

American Institute of Economic Research senior fellow Robert Wright, who lives in Massachusetts, said the app was downloaded onto his Android phone around July 1, 2021, without his knowledge. Johnny Kula, a New Hampshire resident who travels to Massachusetts on a daily basis for work, also said he discovered the app on his phone around the same time, and that it was back on the phone later in 2021 after he uninstalled it.

The plaintiffs’ claims echoed reviews from app store users complaining they had not downloaded the app, but it appeared on their phones. The app, which allowed people to say they had tested positive for COVID-19, and alerted others who had recently been close in location to those people, was downloaded more than one million times, according to court filings. Similar applications were developed by at least 24 other states.

Keep reading

Belarus Bans Promotion of LGBT Ideology, Pedophilia, and Childlessness

The Belarus parliament has passed a bill to criminalize the promotion of gender ideology, pedophilia, homosexuality, and deliberate childlessness, mirroring the laws of its neighboring ally, Russia.

The upper house gave the legislation the seal of approval on April 2, following its passage last month by the lower house, with Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko expected to sign it into law.

The bill makes the “propaganda of homosexual relations, gender charge, refusal to have children, and pedophilia” punishable by fines and community labor.

Homosexuality was decriminalized in Belarus in 1994, following the collapse of the Soviet Union. Same-sex marriage is unlawful in Belarus and in many European nations, including Italy, Cyprus, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Slovakia, and Croatia.

Lukashenko, who has ruled the nation of 9.5 million for more than three decades, is known for his socially conservative views on marriage and the family.

‘The Classic Family’

Russian state media reported him as saying in March 2023 that although he thinks gay men may be “golden people,” he does not believe in the promotion of homosexual relationships because “we need people. Babies. Men don’t give birth. So let’s stick with the classic family.”

Some transgender activists have said that the country’s top security agency, which still bears its Soviet-era name, the KGB, has blackmailed individuals to force them to cooperate.

Keep reading

Leading Ethics Journal Floats Forced Abortion For Minors

Pro-abortion rhetoric has long rested on a slick focus group-tested “pro-choice” mantra, which claims that abortion is necessary for women to have “bodily autonomy.” But pro-abortion “ethicists” are now asserting that “justice for girls” demands that all underage pregnancies end in the death of the unborn child — even if it requires physically or chemically subduing the mother against her will.

That is precisely the case made in a new essay in the April edition of Ethics, the University of Chicago’s elite philosophy journal. Across 31 full pages, our two authors, Alyssa Izatt, a Ph.D. candidate at the University of British Columbia, and Kimberley Brownlee, her UBC professor, explain why compulsory abortion is essential for feminine justice. In fact, in two places they explain enforcing this upon objecting females “might then require sedation or physical restraint” even though it “could be traumatizing,” but still, “the use of restraint (chemical or physical) … is justified as a last resort when it is necessary to provide adequate care.” By “adequate care,” of course, the writers mean killing the mother’s preborn child.

You heard that right. Good-bye, “My body, my choice!” Hello, “Do as you’re told, honey!” Leftist patriarchy parading as feminist empowerment. The pro-abortion ethic is growing ever more sinister.

The authors’ reasoning consists of a basic syllogism, which they admit even the most radical pro-abortion warriors have previously failed to piece together. 

First, abortion is a fundamental, uncontested good. This prejudice is crystal clear in their paper. The only negative observation of abortion they could muster is this: “Having an abortion can be challenging and distressing, even for adult women.” That’s it. They add, “It can be a life-and-death decision, a reality that is far beyond the scope of appropriate childhood responsibilities.” Can be? They never confess whose life is at stake, but one clearly assumes they mean the young mother if she brings her unborn child to term.

Second, the authors assume that underage pregnancy and childbirth are always wrong because of risks to the mother. While the essay is mum on abortion’s risks, it spends pages detailing the physical and psychological dangers of pregnancy for girls and young women. In fact, the authors boldly state without qualification that “a child’s best interests are served by the provision of an abortion: Prioritizing her wellbeing necessitates that physicians and family members view her impregnation as a malady to be treated and take steps to terminate it.” Note that the authors consistently infantilize any female under 18 as “a child.”

Ergo, forced abortion upon underage girls and young women is clearly the most ethical action because they lack the maturity to realize abortion is life-preserving health care. As such, “medical professionals would be failing a child if they withheld abortion care, even if they did so because the child was averse to it.” That is their case.

Keep reading

British Law Enforcement No Longer Policing Social Media Posts Looking for ‘Non-Crime Hate Incidents’, as Commissioner Celebrates Increased Ability To Investigate Real Criminals

British police are back to investigating crime, not hurt feelings.

The United Kingdom is the leading country in incarcerating citizens for social media posts, and – what’s worse – police wasted time and resources with something called ‘non-crime hate incidents’.

You read it right: perfectly legal posts.

But now, the police are no longer involved in these internet arguments, and that has enabled officers to ‘solve more real crimes’.

The Telegraph reported:

“Sir Mark Rowley, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, said the force had doubled the number of real hate crimes that it had solved since he announced in December last year that his force would no longer investigate non-crime hate incidents (NCHIs).

In an exclusive article for The Telegraph, he said this change had already saved officers ‘thousands of hours’, enabling them to devote more time to ‘preventing and solving crime, protecting vulnerable people, and responding to real risks of harm’.”

It’s been two days since Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood announced the abolition of NCHIs nationally.

“Sir Mark, whose force pre-empted the national move, said NCHIs had ‘eroded’ the public’s trust in the police because of ‘unclear guidance’ from policing bodies and the Government on how to apply them.

Officers had been knocking on people’s doors to deal with ‘online squabbles and everyday disagreements that never met the threshold of criminality’, he said.”

Keep reading