Tag: police state

Tech Firms Unite in Open Letter Against EU Chat Scanning Law

With the vote approaching, the European Commission’s plan to scan private digital messages is moving toward final approval.

The regulation, called Chat Control 2.0, has gone through a year of resistance, warnings from experts, and objections from technology companies.

It is presented as a child safety measure, designed to inspect messages, photos, and videos across the EU before they are sent.

The privacy implications are immense.

Alice Weidel, co-leader of Germany’s AfD party, described the proposal as “an absolutely totalitarian project” and “a comprehensive general attack on central citizens and freedoms.”

She said the measure would install scanning software on personal devices, intercepting content before it reaches its recipient. The system would remove the protection offered by end-to-end encryption and treat every user as a potential suspect.

Weidel said the use of child safety language was “a cheap pretext” for real-time surveillance.

“Even the Stasi could only dream of such a full force,” she said, comparing the plan to intercepting and photographing every private letter for review by a government authority.

She warned that once the system exists, its function can expand to include other categories such as “politically offensive content” and “so-called hate speech.” The structure of the law allows the criteria to be adjusted through political decisions.

Technology companies have joined in opposition. Hundreds of privacy-oriented firms, including encrypted messengers, cloud storage services, and VPN providers, signed a joint letter urging EU ministers to reject the regulation.

Their message called for the protection of encryption and for an end to mandatory message scanning.

Signal has announced that it will leave the EU if forced to comply. The platform has stated that it cannot operate under a framework requiring message inspection.

The regulation creates an obligation to weaken the systems that enable private communication and turns encryption into a technical formality rather than a guarantee of privacy.

Supporters of the proposal say it will catch child abusers. Critics point out that criminal networks conduct their operations in offline settings or hidden spaces beyond the reach of such scanning.

“Criminals are already using offline or so-called dark rooms for their illegal businesses,” Weidel said.

Keep reading

Trump Says He May Invoke The INSURRECTION ACT

President Trump declared Monday that he may invoke the Insurrection Act in order to restore law and order to American cities in the face of violent riots and attacks against law enforcement officers, including ICE.

During a press availability in the Oval Office, Trump addressed ongoing legal and political challenges to his administration’s deployments of National Guard troops to major U.S. cities, including Chicago and Portland, Oregon.

Trump was asked directly about invoking the Insurrection Act of 1807—a rarely used federal law that empowers the president to deploy U.S. military forces domestically to suppress insurrections, rebellions, or domestic violence when local authorities are unable or unwilling to maintain order.

The Act bypasses typical restrictions on military use for civilian policing and has been invoked only about 30 times in U.S. history, most recently during the 1992 Los Angeles riots.

Trump stated “Well, I’ll do it if it was necessary… We have an Insurrection Act for a reason. If I had to enact it, I’d do that if people were being killed and courts were holding us up, or governors or mayors were holding us up. I want to make sure people aren’t killed.”

Keep reading

Zelensky Floated Stepping Down from Power ‘For Peace’, but Instead He Is Intimidating and Silencing Opponents, Paving the Way for a Vote That Keeps Him in Office: REPORT

Zelensky is working hard to remain in power.

Between his endless trips abroad to get support and money from his war sponsors, Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky is moving strongly to cement his chances in the event of an upcoming election.

But because his popularity is so low, to achieve that, he has to neutralize his opponents.

Almost no one believed his recent claims that he is ‘ready not to go for the second term’ because ‘it’s not [his] goal’, repeating the claims he made last winter.

Politico reported:

“In a move presumably aiming to take the sting out of the ‘autocrat’ allegation, Zelenskyy announced [last winter] dramatically that he was ‘ready’ to go if his resignation would help secure a ceasefire with Russia and gain Ukraine’s admission into NATO. ‘If [it guarantees] peace for Ukraine, if you really need me to resign, I am ready. I can exchange it for NATO’, he said.

This time round he told Axios: ‘My goal is to finish the war’ and not necessarily to continue to run for office. He also vowed to ask Ukraine’s parliament to organize elections if a ceasefire is agreed.”

Keep reading

FBI: Jack Smith, Biden DOJ Tracked Phone Calls of GOP Senators, Congressman

Nearly ten Republican senators and a representative had their private communications allegedly tracked by former Special Counsel Jack Smith under the Biden administration, FBI Director Kash Patel revealed Monday.

Files obtained by Fox News show that Smith, in his official capacity at the Department of Justice (DOJ) as he investigated President Donald Trump and the events of January 6, 2021, was allegedly tracking the phone calls of Republican Sens. Lindsey Graham (SC), Marsha Blackburn (TN), Ron Johnson (WI), Josh Hawley (MO), Cynthia Lummis (WY), Bill Hagerty (TN), Dan Sullivan (AK), Tommy Tuberville (AL), and Republican Rep. Mike Kelly (PA).

The alarming document, revealing that Smith and his “Arctic Frost” team had subpoenaed telephone providers for the lawmakers’ records in 2023, was “recently discovered” by Patel, according to Fox News.

Patel confirmed the legitimacy of the findings in an X post, writing, “We recently uncovered proof that phone records of U.S. lawmakers were seized for political purposes.”

“That abuse of power ends now,” the FBI director continued. “Under my leadership, the FBI will deliver truth and accountability, and never again be weaponized against the American people.”

An FBI official told the outlet that Smith and his team, which was opened in the bureau in 2022, were able to see which numbers the politicians contacted, the locations from where the calls originated, and the locations where they were received. 

Officials also explained that the records were investigated pursuant to an oversight request from Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), which Patel and FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino personally directed in response. 

A source added that the calls were “likely in reference to the vote to certify the 2020 election,” Fox News reported.

Bongino briefed the impacted lawmakers on Monday afternoon and told the publication it is a “disgrace” that he had to reveal those findings. 

“It is a disgrace that I have to stand on Capitol Hill and reveal this — that the FBI was once weaponized to track the private communications of U.S. lawmakers for political purposes,” Bongino said. “That era is over.”

He added, “Under our leadership, the FBI will never again be used as a political weapon against the American people.”

Keep reading

UN Targets Homeschooling

The United Nations just put a giant target on the backs of homeschoolers worldwide.

Under the guise of “human rights,” the U.N.’s controversial “education” bureaucracy is officially demanding that all governments regulate and control home education—if they allow it at all.

The U.N.’s demands include “education standards” for homeschooling, as well as “accountability” to government.

The outfit is also demanding mandatory registration, forced “evaluations” of homeschoolers by authorities, compulsory “home visits,” and much more.

In fact, the agency is even calling for U.N.-approved values and attitudes to be imposed on children across a wide array of issues, with U.N. control of “education content.”

The new U.N. Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) report on home education, titled “Homeschooling through a human rights lens,” lays out the most draconian global assault on home education in history.

The powerful global agency, long dominated by card-carrying communists, claims governments must bring homeschooling under their thumb—for the benefit of the children, of course.

Unsurprisingly, the top U.N. official involved in the push comes from the “Democratic People’s Republic” of Korea (DPRK), better known as North Korea.

According to the report’s acknowledgements, it was prepared under the “supervision” of Gwang-Chol Chang, chief of the UNESCO Section of Education Policy.

Before joining the U.N. to help transform education globally, Chang worked for the mass-murdering North Korean Communist regime’s “Education Ministry.” The agency operates among the most comprehensive communist brainwashing systems in human history.

And yet, with no sense of the irony, the government controls being demanded by Chang and his minions are said to be necessary to uphold what the global body describes as “international human rights.” Yes, seriously.

If the U.N. agenda is not stopped, parents and even private schools that refuse to comply with the U.N.’s outrageous demands will be accused of violating the “human rights” of children.

The calls for total control are clear—and portrayed as mandatory. “Governments must implement oversight mechanisms such as registration and evaluations,” the report declares (emphasis added), demanding more “regulatory capacity.”

“As homeschooling continues to evolve, adopting a rights-based approach becomes crucial,” the report continues, touting the “need for quality education” as defined by the U.N. through “established minimum education standards and accountability.”

Keep reading

As Mass Chat Surveillance Nears Approval, President von der Leyen is Accused of Transparency Violations Over Deleted Messages

As EU lawmakers push ahead with Chat Control 2.0, a proposal that would compel messaging platforms to scan private conversations, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is once again being called out for sidestepping the very transparency rules meant to keep officials accountable.

The contrast is hard to ignore: while European citizens face the prospect of mass surveillance, von der Leyen continues to ignore the laws and conduct her own communications away from public view.

The latest case involves a message sent by French President Emmanuel Macron in early 2024, during a politically sensitive phase of trade negotiations with Mercosur.

Macron’s message, sent via Signal, reportedly voiced serious reservations about the deal.

When a journalist requested access under EU transparency laws, the Commission first ignored the request for over a year. It then claimed the message could not be retrieved, citing Signal’s disappearing messages setting, which automatically deletes texts after a set time.

This justification has prompted the European Ombudswoman, Teresa Anjinho, to launch a formal inquiry. Her office has requested documentation outlining the Commission’s policies on mobile messaging and message retention, and plans to meet with officials to clarify how the request was handled.

This isn’t the first time von der Leyen’s messaging habits have raised concerns. In the case known as “Pfizergate,” she was criticized for failing to preserve texts exchanged with Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla during Covid vaccine negotiations.

The Commission refused to release the messages, and it later emerged they had been deleted. The New York Times took the matter to court and won, with the European General Court ruling that the Commission had wrongly withheld information of public interest.

Despite these past controversies, little appears to have changed. The Commission claims that messages like Macron’s had no administrative or legal impact and therefore didn’t need to be archived.

Officials have also pointed to concerns over phone storage and security as reasons for using auto-deleting features. These arguments seem increasingly weak in 2025, especially when applied to discussions between heads of state.

The journalist behind the Macron request argues that such deletion practices make it nearly impossible to monitor how decisions are made at the highest level.

Keep reading

Whoops—Ohio Accidentally Excludes Most Major Porn Platforms From Anti-Porn Law

Remember when people used to say “Epic FAIL”? I’m sorry, but there’s no other way to describe Ohio’s new age verification law, which took effect on September 30.

A variation on a mandate that’s been sweeping U.S. statehouses, this law requires online platforms offering “material harmful to juveniles”—by which authorities mean porn—to check photo IDs or use “transactional data” (such as mortgage, education, and employment records) to verify that all visitors are adults.

But lawmakers have written the law in such a way that it excludes most major porn publishing platforms.

“This is why you don’t rush [age verification] bills into an omnibus,” commented the Free Speech Coalition’s Mike Stabile on Bluesky.

Ohio Republican lawmakers introduced a standalone age verification bill back in February, but it languished in a House committee. A similar bill introduced in 2024 also failed to advance out of committee.

The version that wound up passing this year did so as part of the state’s omnibus budget legislation (House Bill 96). This massive measure—more than 3,000 pages—includes a provision that any organization that “disseminates, provides, exhibits, or presents any material or performance that is obscene or harmful to juveniles on the internet” must verify that anyone attempting to view that material is at least 18 years old.

The bill also states that such organizations must “utilize a geofence system maintained and monitored by a licensed location-based technology provider to dynamically monitor the geolocation of persons.”

Existing Ohio law defines material harmful to juveniles as “any material or performance describing or representing nudity, sexual conduct, sexual excitement, or sado-masochistic abuse” that “appeals to the prurient interest of juveniles in sex,” is “patently offensive to prevailing standards in the adult community as a whole with respect to what is suitable for juveniles,” and “lacks serious literary, artistic, political, and scientific value for juveniles.”

Under the new law, online distributors of “material harmful to juveniles” that don’t comply with the age check requirement could face civil actions initiated by Ohio’s attorney general.

Supporters of the law portrayed it as a way to stop young Ohioans from being able to access online porn entirely. But the biggest purveyors of online porn—including Pornhub and similar platforms, which allow users to upload as well as view content—seem to be exempt from the law.

Among the organizations exempted from age verification requirements are providers of “an interactive computer service,” which is defined by Ohio lawmakers as having the same meaning as it does under federal law.

The federal law that defines “interactive computer service”—Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act—says it “means any information service, system, or access software provider that provides or enables computer access by multiple users to a computer server, including specifically a service or system that provides access to the Internet and such systems operated or services offered by libraries or educational institutions.”

That’s a bit of a mouthful, but we have decades of jurisprudence parsing that definition. And it basically means any platform where third parties can create accounts and can generate content, from social media sites to dating apps, message boards, classified ads, search engines, comment sections, and much more.

Platforms like Pornhub unambiguously fall within this category.

In fact, Pornhub is not blocking Ohio users as it has in most other states with age verification laws for online porn, because its parent company, Aylo, does not believe the law applies to it.

“As a provider of an ‘interactive computer service’ as defined under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, it is our understanding that we are not subject to the obligations under section 1349.10 of the Ohio Revised Code regarding mandated age verification for the ‘interactive computer services’ we provide, such as Pornhub,” Aylo told Mashable.

Keep reading

Mexico Bill Proposes Prison for AI Memes Mocking Public Figures

Mexico’s Congress is once again at the center of a free speech storm.

This time, Deputy Armando Corona Arvizu from the ruling Morena party is proposing to make it a crime to create or share AI-generated memes or digital images that make fun of someone without their consent.

His initiative, filed in the Chamber of Deputies, sets out prison terms of three to six years and fines for anyone who “create, manipulate, transform, reproduce or disseminate images, videos, audios or digital representations” made with artificial intelligence for the purpose of “ridiculing, harassing, impersonating or damaging” a person’s “reputation or dignity.”

Read the bill here.

The punishment would increase by half if the person targeted is a public official, minor, or person with a disability, or if the content spreads widely online or causes personal, psychological, or professional harm.

The bill presents itself as protection against digital abuse but is, as always, a new attempt at censorship.

The initiative would insert Articles 211 Bis 8 and 211 Bis 9 into the Federal Penal Code, written in vague and sweeping terms that could cover almost any form of online expression.

It makes no distinction between a malicious deepfake and a harmless meme.

By criminalizing content intended to “ridicule,” the bill allows courts or public figures to decide what counts as ridicule. That opens the door to arbitrary enforcement.

There are no explicit protections for parody, satire, or public-interest criticism, all of which are essential to a free society.

Keep reading

One American town takes war against homeschooling to enraging extremes

Homeschooling and homeschoolers have been under attack across America in a number of ways over recent years.

Despite those barrages, the industry is growing hugely.

But there have been special exams demanded, invasive interviews, physical exams, odd requirements for homeschool teachers and much more at times. In one case state officials rejected a college diploma submitted by a homeschool teacher because it was written in Latin.

Now one Maine town is going to an extreme – an attempt to bar those connected with homeschooling from serving on a local public board, the school board.

According to the Institute for Justice, “Town officials in Dexter, Maine are considering a proposal that bars homeschool co-op leaders and private-school employees from serving on the local school board.”

While supporters for the barrier claim it would prevent conflicts of interest, the IJ reported it actually is “retaliatory.”

The IJ noted that last summer, Dexter voters recalled school board member Alisha Ames, leader of the town’s only homeschool co-op, Power Source Ministries.

“The recall came after a campaign by the Facebook group ‘Stop the Power Trip,’ which accused her of putting the co-op ahead of public schools,” the IJ noted. “Even if the recall of Ames was warranted, the proposed ordinance goes much further. Instead of addressing one individual, it would bar homeschool co-op leaders and private-school employees from serving on the school board, shutting out many other residents from their right to serve their community.”

The backlash already has begun. State Rep. Heidi Sampson, of the Maine Education Initiative, warned town officials in a letter they are refusing to abide by First Amendment precedents, and that “exposes the town to significant liability.”

Keep reading

California’s Vague ‘Hate Speech’ Bill Would Force Big Tech To Censor Mainstream Conservative Views

alifornia lawmakers are once again leading the charge — not toward progress, but toward repression. Their latest move, Senate Bill 771 (SB-771), is being packaged as a bold stand against “hate” on social media. In reality, it’s a direct assault on the free expression and constitutionally protected speech of ministries, minority groups, and faith-based organizations.

The bill would force Big Tech to remove content that could be interpreted as “harassment” or “intimidation” based on race, gender identity, sexual orientation, and more — or face financially devastating lawsuits.

If Gov. Gavin Newsom signs this bill into law as expected, it will become one of the most dangerous speech-restricting laws in the country. Cloaked in the language of civil rights, SB-771 is built to punish dissent from progressive orthodoxy.

The target is anyone who dares to speak publicly about values or perspectives that conflict with the state’s ever-expanding list of protected identities. In practice, this means community groups sharing discussions on traditional family structures, cultural views on gender roles, or advocacy for certain social issues may find themselves silenced — not by law enforcement, but by tech giants eager to avoid legal risk.

The bills says:

California law prohibits all persons and entities, including corporations, from engaging in, aiding, abetting, or conspiring to commit acts of violence, intimidation, or coercion based on race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, immigration status, or other protected characteristics.

 3273.73. (a) A social media platform that violates Section 51.7, 51.9, 52, or 52.1 through its algorithms that relay content to users or aids, abets, acts in concert, or conspires in a violation of any of those sections, or is a joint tortfeasor in a violation of any of those sections, shall, in addition to any other remedy, be liable to a prevailing plaintiff for a civil penalty for each violation sufficient to deter future violations but not to exceed the following:

(1) For an intentional, knowing, or willful violation, a civil penalty of up to one million dollars

(2) For a reckless violation, a civil penalty of up to five hundred thousand dollars.


This language may appear just, but its sweeping terms — “intimidation,” “coercion,” even “aiding” — are dangerously vague. In the hands of ideologically motivated actors, they can be weaponized to silence constitutionally protected discourse under the guise of enforcing civil rights.

That’s the chilling brilliance of SB-771: it outsources censorship to the private sector under threat of state-enforced financial ruin. The law doesn’t need to directly ban speech — it just makes the cost of hosting it too high for Big Tech to tolerate. This will especially impact small ministries, minority-led organizations, and faith-based nonprofits with limited legal or technical resources. For them, one flagged post — perhaps a cultural reference taken out of context — could mean being shadow-banned or deplatformed altogether.

Keep reading