Tag: police state

Former U.S. Marine Who Advised VP JD Vance on Myanmar Detained by Myanmar Authorities

A former U.S. Marine officer and former head of the American Chamber of Commerce in Myanmar has been detained by Myanmar authorities.

Adam Castillo, who was traveling to Myanmar to promote his new book, “Finding Our Voice,” which critiques Myanmar’s Junta for human rights abuses, was detained as he re-entered the Southeast Asian nation.

The U.S. State Department has since been briefed on Castillo’s arrest but has not released a comment due to “privacy concerns.”

Per Reuters:

An American businessman who wrote a book about living through a military coup ‌in Myanmar was detained on his return to the Southeast Asian ‌nation on Thursday, according to two people briefed on the matter.

Adam Castillo, a former head ​of the American Chamber of Commerce in Myanmar who is based in Yangon where he runs a security firm, was stopped at an airport after traveling to the country, one of the people said.

A U.S. State Department spokesperson said it was ‌aware of reports of ⁠the detention of an American in Myanmar but had no further comment “due to privacy concerns”.

A spokesperson for the military-backed government ⁠did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

In July of last year, Castillo attended a meeting at Vice President JD Vance’s office to discuss U.S. relations with Myanmar.

In the meeting, Castillo suggested the United States “could play a peace-broker role in Myanmar and urged Washington to take a page out of China’s playbook by first brokering a bilateral self-governance deal between the Myanmar military and the Kachin Independence Army (KIA).

Castillo has been among several voices urging Washington to adopt strategic policies toward Myanmar, given the country’s status as the third-largest producer of rare earth minerals/metals.

Keep reading

MINISTRY OF TRUTH: Government To BLOCK ‘False Information’ During ‘Crisis Events’

Vague new rules will allow UK regulators to pressure platforms over “legal but harmful” content whenever government ministers declare a crisis, while the same government ploughs ahead with mandatory phone scanning, digital ID lockdowns, and jail threats for tech bosses who refuse to spy on every device.

The latest move from Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn makes explicit what privacy campaigners have long warned: the Online Safety Act is being weaponised far beyond any child-protection claim.

Benn confirmed that the internet regulator will now wield enhanced powers to tackle “false information” online during “times of crisis,” directly tying the recent Belfast unrest to this framework. The regulator has already contacted platforms, with ministers asserting that violence “appears to have been incited online.”

Benn stated that if people put online ‘false information,’ “it is not acceptable and it may well be a criminal offence depending on the circumstances as the chief constable made clear yesterday.”

When asked how a “time of crisis” would be defined, Benn said it “will be set out in due course.”

Keep reading

Canada’s Bill C-34 Would Require ID or Face Scan to Use Social Media

Canada’s long-anticipated and dreaded Bill C-34 arrived on June 10 with the usual fanfare about protecting children.

We obtained a copy of the bill for you here.

Marc Miller, the Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture, tabled it.

Strip off the press release and what is left is a law that lets an appointed federal body order Canadians’ posts deleted across the country, decide which platforms can give an account to a 15-year-old, and tell AI chatbots to watch what you type.

It also bans Canadians under 16 from social media by charging the whole country for it, in the currency of everyone’s privacy.

The government calls it the Safe Social Media Act. Safe for whom is the question it would rather you not dwell on.

The law creates a Digital Safety Commission of Canada. Cabinet appoints its three to five members. The same body writes the rules, runs the inspections, hears the complaints, and hands out the fines, which is a regulator and a courtroom folded into one office that answers to no voter.

Everything hangs on a phrase the bill declines to nail down, “harmful content.” There are seven categories, among them “content used to bully a child” and “content that foments hatred.”

The drafters did take the trouble to say content is not hateful merely because it “discredits, humiliates, hurts or offends,” which is more care than these laws usually take.

It also changes very little because the people drawing the line day to day are the platforms, working from rules the Commission can rewrite whenever it wants. The edge of what a Canadian is allowed to say can shift without anyone in Parliament casting a vote.

So here is how a deletion goes. A platform decides it has “reasonable grounds to suspect” your post is child sexual abuse material or an intimate image shared without consent.

From that moment it has 24 hours to make the post inaccessible to every person in Canada. Down first, explained afterward. You can file representations and request a reconsideration, and your words stay gone the entire time you are waiting. Or someone skips you altogether and reports the post to the Commission, which can order it made “permanently inaccessible.” No judge appears anywhere in that sequence.

The definitions get bigger the longer you look at them. “Intimate content communicated without consent” now reaches AI images “likely to be mistaken for” a real recording of a person.

As a ban on revenge porn; reasonable, depending on how it’s implemented. But as written, those same words also cover a tasteless deepfake of a sitting politician, and the person sorting one from the other works for the company that gets fined either way.

Companies do not agonize over that distinction. They delete and move on.

Keep reading

US Investigating Iran War Critic Trita Parsi, Co-Founder Of Non-Interventionist Think Tank

The Trump administration has launched an investigation into prominent Iran war critic Trita Parsi, according to a report in the Free Press.

According to US officials and documents reviewed by the pro-Trump outlet, officials are looking into the possibility of deporting Parsi, who holds both Iranian and Swedish citizenship.

Parsi, who is co-founder and executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft and co-founded the National Iranian-American Council (NIAC), has been a vocal opponent of the ongoing US attacks on Iran.

A Trump official told the Free Press that US Secretary of State Marco Rubio had been “very clear” in his intentions to tackle “people who support adversaries of ours and whose work furthers their agenda and undermines our security.

“Anyone who seeks to undermine the US, we’re taking a hard look at,” the official said.

Since the beginning of the US-Israeli attack on Iran in February, the Trump administration has increasingly targeted figures of Iranian descent in the US.

In April, Hamideh Soleimani Afshar and her daughter Sarina were detained and had their residency permits rescinded after they were – incorrectly – identified as relatives of former Iranian military commander Qassem Soleimani by far-right influencer Laura Loomer.

Despite denying their links to Soleimani, the pair remain in custody in Texas.

The US also detained and revoked the green cards of relatives of former Iranian minister Masoumeh Ebtekar in April.

Parsi is a critic of the Islamic Republic whose family fled to Sweden to escape persecution in Iran. He has faced attacks from Iranian monarchists and pro-Trump figures over his opposition to the conflict.

He has also been highly critical of US backing for what many call Israel’s genocide in Gaza and its attacks on Lebanon.

Speaking to Middle East Eye in May, Parsi warned that the US’s ability to secure a deal with Iran would ultimately come down to its ability to restrain Israeli attacks in the region.

“If Trump either cannot or will not do so, then the value of any agreement with Washington comes sharply into question,” he said.

Keep reading

Section 702 Surveillance Reaches Its Friday Deadline. Why “Going Dark” Is a Myth.

The government’s broadest warrantless surveillance power is set to expire Friday after the House refused to keep it running.

Lawmakers voted down a three-week extension of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act on Thursday, 218 to 198, with 19 Republicans joining most Democrats against it and seven Democrats crossing over in support.

Speaker Mike Johnson had fast-tracked the bill under a process that needed a two-thirds majority, so the lopsided count sank it. The House then left town for a scheduled weeklong recess, which removes any path to a quick fix. Congress has already punted twice since the original April deadline.

The reaction from the program’s defenders followed a familiar script. They raised the same alarm at earlier deadlines and the catastrophe never showed up.

When Congress last renewed the authority in 2024, the law slipped past its midnight deadline and lapsed for under an hour before the Senate restored it and the surveillance kept running through the gap.

The warnings are back this week regardless. Sen. Tom Cotton, an Arkansas Republican, pressed for renewal ahead of the World Cup and backers keep noting that Section 702 feeds more than half of the president’s daily intelligence briefing.

“Democrats in the Senate are playing political games right now with the lives of Americans,” Johnson told reporters Wednesday. “It’s a very dangerous situation.”

What actually arrives at midnight Friday is legal limbo, not a blackout.

The FISA court signed off on the current collection in March and that order runs until 2027, so the machinery keeps operating on permission it already holds.

The court’s authorization runs for another year and the program continues whether Congress acts or not. The honest word for the risk is uncertainty, the kind that government lawyers and company lawyers argue over, and uncertainty does not sound like an emergency. So the defenders reach for “going dark” instead.

What sunsets at midnight is all of Title VII of the surveillance law, which carries separate powers the government uses to spy on Americans living abroad.

Keep reading

ACLU Sues After Facial Recognition Falsely Identifies Florida Man as a Child Abductor

Police arrested a man in Florida for attempted child abduction in a town he had never visited, and the only evidence linking him to the crime was an AI facial recognition hit. Represented by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), he is now suing the officers and agencies who put him through it.

In November 2023, police in Jacksonville Beach, Florida, responded to a call about an attempted child abduction at a McDonald’s. Witnesses said an adult man allegedly tried to get the child, identified as a girl under 12 years old, to leave the restaurant with him. According to a police report, facial recognition software concluded with 93 percent confidence that the suspect was Robert Dillon.

In August 2024, Deputies arrested Dillon at his home in Fort Myers, Florida—hundreds of miles away, at the opposite end of the state. “Are you shitting me, man?” Dillon asked the arresting deputy. “I haven’t been out of Fort Myers in two years.” Further, he also said he had never been to Jacksonville Beach.

Dillon posted bail and pleaded not guilty to enticing or luring a child—a third-degree felony, punishable by up to five years in prison. More than two months later, prosecutors dropped the charges after his attorney provided evidence that he was at work on the day in question.

But that doesn’t excuse the fact that he was only arrested in the first place, and threatened with prosecution for a particularly heinous offense, because of shoddy police work.

The ACLU is now suing the city of Jacksonville Beach, as well as the individual police officers and officials involved in the case. According to the lawsuit, the responding officer viewed security camera footage of the suspect but didn’t take a copy; instead, he took pictures of the screen with his cell phone. “In the photos, the suspect image is low resolution, and the suspect’s face is partially shadowed and off-axis,” the lawsuit claims.

When an investigator queried the facial recognition system, it was with the officer’s grainy secondhand cell phone photos.

But there were other leads that police could have followed, to either bolster their case or point in another direction. For example, when he approached the girl, the suspect was picking up food that had been ordered ahead; this implies he had an online account, with contact information and a form of payment attached.

“These records could have been used to identify the actual person who placed the suspect’s order,” the lawsuit notes. “Upon information and belief, Jacksonville Beach PD personnel never requested or obtained mobile ordering records, payment data, or online account information from McDonald’s.”

Further, the McDonald’s manager recognized the assailant as a “regular customer”—likely precluding Dillon, who lived and worked on the other side of the state and did not frequently travel. Besides, at no point did investigators search footage for the suspect’s previous visits, either for higher quality images or transaction records. And once they settled on Dillon as a suspect, investigators could have gotten a warrant for his cell phone’s GPS data, showing whether or not he was at a fast food restaurant 300 miles away from his home on the night in question.

The lawsuit notes that when Dillon’s name came up, investigating officer Scott O’Connell queried the police database of license plate readers, which did not detect Dillon’s vehicles in Jacksonville Beach within the 48 hours surrounding the attempted abduction.

Keep reading

US Jewish leaders throw support behind bipartisan House antisemitism bill

New York Reps. Dan Goldman and Mike Lawler introduced bipartisan legislation Wednesday aimed at expanding federal support for securing Jewish institutions and combating antisemitism.

The bill, a House companion to the Jewish American Security Act in the Senate, would increase funding for the Nonprofit Security Grant Program, which helps secure religious institutions,  to $1 billion, extend funding to Jewish organizations, and allow additional funds to be directed toward law enforcement.

It would also mandate that the Department of Education appoint a dedicated antisemitism coordinator and force social media platforms to explain their handling of online antisemitism.

The bill received support from major national Jewish groups. On Wednesday, during a press conference in Washington, DC, Lawler and Goldman were joined by a host of Jewish leaders, including representatives from the Anti-Defamation League, the Jewish Council for Public Affairs and the American Jewish Committee, as well as organizations affiliated with the Reform and Orthodox movements.

“Jewish communities across the United States are facing a real and growing security crisis, and the federal government has a responsibility to ensure that all Americans can gather, worship, and live openly and safely as who they are,” Eric Fingerhut, the CEO and president of the Jewish Federations of North America, which has promoted the bill, said in a statement.

Keep reading

Report: Personal Crimes in Gun-Controlled Australia Triple that of Gun-Friendly USA

Personal crimes such as rape and sexual assault are three times higher in gun-controlled Australia than in the USA, a report in the Spectator/Australia on Wednesday details.

Written by Malcolm Roberts and John Lott, Jr., the report begins by explaining that the establishment media’s approach to coverage and the method of compiling crime stats leads many to believe Australia’s “crime rate is low compared with the countries like the United States.”

The media “reinforces the myth” of lower crime while less than 20 percent of rapes and sexual assaults are reported to Australian police. However, in the U.S.,  45 percent of such personal crimes are reported to police. This difference in the level of personal crime reporting skews the figures seen by the populations of both countries and feeds into the establishment media’s low-crime narrative.

After a hard look at the real numbers, Roberts and Lott wrote: “Australia’s rape and sexual assault rate is roughly three times higher than that of the United States. Australia’s assault rate is about twice as high, and its burglary rate is about 2.5 times higher. Robbery is the only category where the two countries report similar rates.”

Keep reading

Carney using kids’ safety as cover to strip Canadians’ freedom

The Liberal government is preparing to introduce a new digital safety bill that would ban social media for users under 16, but on Tuesday’s episode of The Ezra Levant Show, Ezra said this new legislation has nothing to do with protecting children.

“Parents can limit what their kids watch with the push of a button,” he said. “This is really about everyone else. Again, using kids as the excuse.”

The bill, reported by the Globe and Mail ahead of its introduction, would create a new digital regulator to establish safety standards for social media platforms. It would also address artificial intelligence and chatbots.

But the mechanism required to enforce an under-16 ban, Ezra noted, is the problem. To determine who is under 16, every user would need to verify their age — meaning every Canadian would need to hand their personal identification to the government just to log on.

“Mark Carney wants to make everyone sign into the internet,” he said. “It’s not actually about kids, is it?”

Ezra drew a direct line to the Liberals’ past censorship efforts, noting that child protection and anti-terrorism provisions have repeatedly been used as packaging for speech regulation bills — provisions that already exist in the Criminal Code, added as a distraction from the bills’ real purpose.

“Governments use children as a cover for their plots,” he reminded viewers.

The timing raised eyebrows, as the day before Canada’s announcement, U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer delivered an almost identical speech calling on tech companies to introduce device controls to prevent children from sending and receiving explicit images.

Ezra said the parallel is not a coincidence. “On everything from censorship and digital ID to environmentalism and mass immigration, I really think Keir Starmer is setting a lot of Canadian policy,” he said.

The irony, he noted, is that Starmer has refused to call a meaningful public inquiry into the U.K.’s rape gangs and even vigorously opposed one when he was the country’s chief prosecutor.

“What a laugh to pretend he cares about kids,” Ezra said.

Another provision in the bill would grant the Canadian government a security backdoor into any app it chooses. Ezra also pointed out that every major social media platform in Canada is American owned, meaning new fines and restrictions would amount to a tax on U.S. tech firms.

Keep reading

The White House’s AI Deal: Kill State Laws, Demand Your ID

The White House is dangling something the technology industry has wanted for years: a federal block on state AI laws and the price is a national age verification push that chips away at anonymous internet use.

The administration is negotiating a federal preemption of state AI laws in exchange for its support of key tech policy priorities from the Hill, according to Axios, and the bills it would back include the Kids Online Safety Act, the NO FAKES Act, and age verification requirements.

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) is steering the talks. “Senator Blackburn is spearheading the negotiation with the White House to finalize legislative text of an AI preemption package that includes protections for kids, creators, and communities through the Senate version of KOSA, the NO FAKES Act, and age verification requirements,” a Blackburn spokesperson said.

The administration kept its own language vague. “The White House continues to proactively engage across government and industry,” a White House official said.

Strip away the framing and the age verification piece asks something concrete of you. To prove you are old enough, you upload a government ID, submit to a face scan, or let a service study your behavior closely enough to guess your age. None of those confirms age and nothing else. They confirm identity and they leave a record that outlives the check.

The internet that once let you be a username starts to demand your legal name, your face, or your documents.

The bigger trade sits underneath the child-safety language. States have been writing their own AI rules, some addressing how companies collect biometric data and automate decisions about residents.

Preemption would freeze that, removing one of the few places people have to push back on how these systems handle their data.

The maneuvering also signals which bill is fading. A bipartisan proposal from Reps. Jay Obernolte (R-Calif.) and Lori Trahan (D-Mass.) isn’t the likely vehicle for AI policy in this Congress. That bill would preempt state AI laws for three years and require certain developers to address risks before releasing models.

Keep reading