Tag: police state

UK Government Moves to Investigate 4chan Under Draconian ‘Online Safety Act’ — Platform’s SAVAGE Response Leaves Them Humiliated

The British government is at it again, weaponizing its so-called “Online Safety Act” to crack down on speech it doesn’t like.

This time, the target is none other than the online forum 4chan, the notorious online discussion board where anonymous users post unfiltered commentary that sends elites into fits.

On June 10, 2025, Ofcom, the UK’s Orwellian Office of Communications, opened an official investigation into 4chan.

According to Ofcom, the platform failed to hand over information on demand, did not file the “appropriate illegal content risk assessments,” and didn’t bow to London’s censorship mandates. In other words, 4chan refused to bend the knee.

By August 13, Ofcom escalated matters, issuing a provisional notice of contravention under the Act and threatening fines of £20,000 ($27,100) plus daily penalties until the platform complied.

According to the notice:

Provisional Decision: Information Notice duties

In accordance with section 130 of the Online Safety Act 2023, we have today issued 4chan Community Support LLC with a provisional notice of contravention.

Ofcom is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing the provider has contravened its duties under section 102(8) of the Act to comply with two requests for information. We will consider any representations provided in response to this provisional notice before we make a final decision on this matter.

The additional duties under investigation

On 10 June 2025, we opened an investigation into whether the provider of 4chan has failed/is failing to comply with its duties under the Online Safety Act 2023 to:

  • adequately respond to a statutory information request;
  • complete and keep a record of a suitable and sufficient illegal content risk assessment; and
  • comply with the safety duties about illegal content.

Ofcom’s investigation continues to examine concurrently whether there are reasonable grounds to believe that the provider has failed, or is failing, to comply with the other duties under investigation, including duties to protect its users from illegal content. We will provide updates on these matters in due course.

But instead of cowering, 4chan and its legal team fired back with a blistering response that left Ofcom and Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s censors utterly humiliated.

In a blistering legal statement posted by Byrne & Storm, P.C. and Coleman Law, P.C., 4chan’s lawyers dismantled Ofcom’s fantasy that they had authority over an American company.

The statement went further, warning that U.S. federal authorities had already been briefed and that the Trump Administration should be prepared to step in to defend American companies against foreign censorship mandates.

The statement reads:

According to press reports, the U.K. Office of Communications (“Ofcom”) has issued a provisional notice under the Online Safety Act alleging a contravention by 4chan and indicating an intention to impose a penalty of £20,000, plus daily penalties thereafter.

4chan is a United States company, incorporated in Delaware, with no establishment, assets, or operations in the United Kingdom. Any attempt to impose or enforce a penalty against 4chan will be resisted in U.S. federal court.

American businesses do not surrender their First Amendment rights because a foreign bureaucrat sends them an e-mail. Under settled principles of U.S. law, American courts will not enforce foreign penal fines or censorship codes.

If necessary, we will seek appropriate relief in U.S. federal court to confirm these principles.

United States federal authorities have been briefed on this matter.

The Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer, was reportedly warned by the White House to cease targeting Americans with U.K. censorship codes (according to reporting in the Telegraph on July 30th).

Despite these warnings, Ofcom continues its illegal campaign of harassment against American technology firms. A political solution to this matter is urgently required and that solution must come from the highest levels of American government.

We call on the Trump Administration to invoke all diplomatic and legal levers available to the United States to protect American companies from extraterritorial censorship mandates.

Our client reserves all rights.

Keep reading

An Unprecedented Crackdown in South Korea: Former President and First Lady Jailed, 5 Million Party Members Targeted

Can you imagine a former president and first lady jailed at the same time — and the personal data of 5 million citizens seized by the regime?

In 2025, this nightmare has become my reality. This is not justice.

It is a planned political purge that should alarm everyone who values freedom, the rule of law, and the U.S.-Korea alliance.

A First in History — and a Dangerous Precedent

On January 19, 2025, former President Yoon Suk-yeol was arrested on vague “evidence tampering” charges.

Prosecutors alleged he tried to conceal certain records, yet presented no clear evidence or case outline.

He was detained for 52 days until March 8, when a court ruled his detention had “seriously violated his right to legal defense” and ordered his release.

But the authorities ignored this ruling. On July 10, Yoon was arrested again on nearly identical charges. The court rejected his appeal and sent him back to prison — raising serious concerns of double jeopardy and judicial abuse.

Then, on August 12, something never before seen in South Korea’s democracy occurred. Former First Lady Kim Keon-hee was immediately jailed on the order of the Seoul Southern District Court.

The warrant was issued without sufficient investigation or evidence — based solely on a claim of “possible evidence destruction.” Legal experts inside and outside Korea agree this decision fails to meet both domestic and international standards of justice.

The simultaneous jailing of a former president and first lady is no coincidence. It is a political move to eliminate all opposition.

Keep reading

I Lost My Freedom, Money, And Guns Based On No Evidence And With No Chance To Defend Myself

Three weeks. That’s how long I was separated from my daughter. No trial. No crime. No violence. Just a single sheet of paper — a Protection from Abuse Order, or PFA — a civil court order meant to prevent harm, often issued on little more than an accusation. It can strip someone of contact with his or her children, home, and firearms — without a criminal charge. That paper took my daughter away from me.

I was only 23.

My daughter was just a few months old. I was still learning how to be a dad — still learning the rhythms of fatherhood. Then she was gone. A sheriff handed me the order at my front door. I knew I was in for an uphill battle.

Over the next three weeks, I scrambled to find an attorney, build a defense, and dig through evidence to prove my innocence. Those weeks didn’t just take away my daughter. They took away my dignity. My voice. And for a time, my will to speak. 

The State of Exception

Legal theorist Carl Schmitt once wrote: “Sovereign is he who decides the exception.” In other words, the true power of the state lies not in making laws, but in deciding when the law no longer applies. The sovereign is the one who can suspend the rules in the name of security, order, or necessity. Philosopher Giorgio Agamben built on this idea, warning that modern states increasingly rule through exceptions — moments when the law suspends itself in the name of preserving order.

Most people think of these exceptions in cinematic terms, such as Abraham Lincoln suspending habeas corpus during the Civil War, the War on Terror and Guantanamo Bay, lockdowns during the Covid-19 pandemic.

But a quieter kind happens in family court every day. No headlines. No outrage. Just a form, a sheriff, and silence.

That’s what a PFA is. It suspends due process, assumes guilt, and punishes before harm occurs. It creates what Agamben called a “zone of indistinction” — where someone is both inside the law and excluded from its protections. The man served a PFA becomes what Agamben called the Homo Sacer: not just punished without trial, but guilty until proven innocent.

This isn’t tyranny in jackboots. It’s softer. Bureaucratic. A form, not a trial. Control, not compassion. It’s preemptive punishment. 

Keep reading

Judge Puts Infowars Up For Sale Again As Leftists Clamor For Alex Jones Takedown

The establishment media has long argued that the Sandy Hook lawsuits against Alex Jones and his company, Free Speech Systems, are about “justice” for grieving parents suffering from harassment.  However, the actions of the plaintiffs and others involved in the civil case suggest that their goals are highly political and have little to do with compensating for alleged pain caused by Jones voicing his opinions on the event. 

If the suit was simply about reparations for hardship of the “victims” caused by defamation, then the payout would have been based on an amount Jones could realistically produce.  Instead, judges awarded 15 plaintiffs $1.5 billion in damages; an insane punishment designed to bury Jones forever. 

Because a bankruptcy judge in Connecticut ruled Jones’ behavior was “willful and malicious” in spreading “false information” about the Sandy Hook shooting, his debt to the families cannot be erased through bankruptcy proceedings and Jones could be required to continue to pay on all future income until the the plaintiffs receive the full amount. 

Meaning, the political left wants to make Jones into a pauper or a slave for the rest of his life and a cautionary tale to others in the alternative media. 

Furthermore, officials in charge of the initial auction allegedly rigged the outcome in favor of a sale to leftist propaganda rag, The Onion.  The Onion did not have the cash on hand to service their $7 million bid for the sale, instead they relied on a deal that would have tapped into Jones’ future payments to the plaintiffs, as if Jones’ wallet could be treated as a bank account in control of The Onion (otherwise known as a “contingency bid”).  

The Onion offered $1.75 million in actual cash for Infowars assets. First United American Companies, which runs a website in Jones’ name that sells nutritional supplements bid $3.5 million, but somehow The Onion still won the auction.  Bankruptcy Judge Christopher Lopez blocked the sale and criticized the auction process as flawed.  He said the outcome “left a lot of money on the table” for families of victims of the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. 

In other words, this suggests that the plaintiffs were willing to sacrifice part of their damages just to see The Onion take control of Infowars and humiliate Jones. But again, the lawsuits weren’t politically motivated at all…

A new decision by Texas Judge Maya Guerra Gamble in a Wednesday hearing orders that Infowars’ parent company, Free Speech Systems, will once again be turned over to a court-appointed receiver, who will be responsible for selling the assets and using the proceeds to pay Jones’ debts to the Sandy Hook families.

Numerous progressive legacy outlets jumped on the story this week, all of them hoping that The Onion will still be able to buy the brand and turn it into a “parody of itself”.  Of course, this would require that they have more cash on hand than any competing buyers.  It also requires a level of comedy talent that doesn’t exist at The Onion, which means readers would be few and the Infowars parody website would likely fade into obscurity.   

Leftists have been salivating over the possible dismantling of Alex Jones’ media empire for years, believing that the selling of his assets will represent a massive “victory” for their side and remove one of their most popular enemies from the culture war chessboard. 

Keep reading

Reed College investigates security chief for giving FBI info on anti-ICE alum

Reed College’s director of community safety is under internal investigation for helping the FBI locate a recent graduate who allegedly threw a rock at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer, according to an open letter from its president to the campus community.

The private Portland, Oregon college’s actions have raised questions about student privacy as well as the college’s actions against its safety officer.

Gary Granger is still listed as the community safety director on the college’s website. However, an email that The Fix sent to Granger on Friday was returned with an automated response stating he is “currently out of the office.”

The college’s President Audrey Bilger announced an investigation into Granger’s actions after he gave information to the FBI “apparently without a subpoena or warrant,” according to her July 29 statement.

“Reed has established protocols and values, and we are initiating an investigation into this action and its impact on our standards and our community,” Bilger wrote. “Reed prioritizes the privacy and rights of our students, faculty, staff, alumni, and all members of our community.”

She also wrote she understands concerns voiced by students and alumni about the incident, and “the college is treating this matter with the seriousness it warrants. Reed maintains clear policies and provides regular training to ensure that information is managed responsibly and in alignment with legal requirements and institutional values.”

Keep reading

Texas Crime Labs Say They Don’t Have Enough Resources To Test Hemp Products For THC As Lawmakers Consider Ban

As Texas lawmakers debate whether to regulate or ban THC products, officials with the state’s crime labs say they don’t have the resources currently to enforce whatever law is passed.

“From a crime lab perspective, mercifully, we don’t have a dog in that fight. I really don’t care. Just tell me what I need to test, and then I need resources to be able to provide that result,” Peter Stout, president and chief executive officer for the Houston Forensic Science Center, told The Texas Tribune after he testified before the House Public Health Committee on Wednesday. “Otherwise, I become the reason the wheel falls off this wagon, which has basically been the last six years now.”

Wednesday’s committee hearing centered on House Bill 5, which would create a blanket ban on products containing any “detectable amount of any cannabinoid” other than cannabidiol and cannabigerol, better known as CBD and CBG, non-intoxicating components of cannabis. This bill would eliminate the majority of hemp products, including those that are legal under the federal definition.

”There’s been countless reports of artificial and synthetic cannabinoids and their effects on the consumer, and these products have become readily available,” said Rep. Gary VanDeaver, R-New Boston, the committee’s chair and HB 5’s author. “Some of these products are marketed in a way that is attractive to children, for example common food products, like candy.”

The Senate’s version of the bill also calls for a ban, but since Gov. Greg Abbott (R) earlier this year vetoed similar legislation that would have banned THC, some lawmakers have signaled they’d support more regulations over a ban.

Kim Carmichael, spokesperson for House Speaker Dustin Burrows, R-Lubbock, told The Texas Tribune that the House hasn’t committed to a ban.

“HB 5 was filed as a similar bill to what the House passed in the regular session, because that’s the most logical starting point for negotiations,” Carmichael said. “Since it passed in that form, members believed they should resume debate where it ended up. It would still go through the process of a public hearing and floor debate, so where it ends up is unknown at this time.”

Experts invited by lawmakers on Wednesday to talk about THC largely focused on the health dangers of THC, the possible criminal networks that underlie the industry, and the impossible task of enforcement.

Keep reading

Child Protective Services Investigated Her 4 Times Because She Let Her Kids Play Outside

Parenting expectations are often unreasonably high—and so is the number of people who believe that kids can’t handle anything on their own.

Passersby too often see an unsupervised child and assume they are unsafe. So they call the authorities, who also often share those super-sized fears. Then parents get investigated simply for trusting their kids with some age-appropriate, location-appropriate independence.

Because of this frustrating cycle, I frequently get letters like the one below. When people ask why I spend so much time trying to pass Reasonable Childhood Independence laws, it’s for people like Emily Fields and her children. Fields is a mom in small-town Virginia who responded to my nonprofit Let Grow’s call for parents willing to speak to child protective services about why such laws are necessary. (Virginia unanimously passed its Reasonable Childhood Independence law in 2023.)

This letter is presented as a stark example of how little trust our country has in its parents and children anymore—and how misanthropic neighbors can weaponize the state at will.

Keep reading

Massachusetts State Police spent $217,000 on luxury hotel stays, international flights, and more

Mass State Police shelled out more than $200,000 on stays at 4- and 5-star hotels from Aruba to Florida, along with international flights and other expenses during the last fiscal year.

The Herald is sifting through state agencies’ taxpayer-funded credit card expenditures — finding that Mass State Police racked up $217,957 in procurement card (P-card) expenses in fiscal year 2025.

That includes stays at Aruba’s Manchebo Beach Resort & Spa for a total of $6,050, and Aruba’s Bucuti & Tara Beach Resort for a total of $4,344. MSP also had a $1,320 bill for a rental car in Aruba.

Some of the other biggest hotel bills from the last year were at Champlin’s Hotel, Marina & Resort in Rhode Island for a total of $9,179; Chicago Marriott Downtown Magnificent Mile for a total of $8,475; and Harborside Inn on Martha’s Vineyard for a total of $5,062.

Mass State Police, which has been emphasizing the importance of transparency as the embattled agency tries to restore trust following a string of scandals, will not provide details on these expenditures and the purpose for these pricey trips.

“We do not have a comment to provide on these State Police operational matters,” a Mass State Police spokesperson said in a statement.

Recently, the Herald shed light on the P-card bills for Attorney General Andrea Campbell’s office and Suffolk County Sheriff Steven Tompkins, who was indicted last week on federal charges.

Some of the MSP charges are related to the governor’s executive protection, but not all of them.

“The Massachusetts State Police takes seriously our solemn obligation to keep elected officials safe during their tenures in office,” the MSP spokesperson said. “Constitutional Officers in Massachusetts and across the country have long had Executive Protection that travels with them.

“This is essential for ensuring the safety and security of our state’s top leaders, while also ensuring the safety of the general public,” the spokesperson added. “This security is all the more important in this moment when political violence is on the rise, with several recent and tragic attacks on elected officials. Due to operational concerns, we do not comment on resource allocations of protective details.”

The timing of Gov. Maura Healey’s office purchasing hotel stays in Washington, D.C. and elsewhere line up with some of MSP’s fancy hotel expenditures.

Keep reading

Illinois State Police Trooper Charged for Allegedly Possessing, Distributing Child Porn

A state police trooper in Deerfield, Illinois, is facing child pornography charges linked to the app known as Kik.

The suspect is identified as 38-year-old Illinois State Police Trooper Colin Gruenke, the Lake and McHenry County Scanner reported on Friday.

“A criminal complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois said an investigation began last year after the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) received a report of the social networking platform Kik,” the article said.

Kik alerted authorities when it appeared someone was using a profile on the platform to upload and distribute files of child porn in September. Not long after the first tip was issued, Kik said another account was uploading and distributing files containing that form of material.

When those accounts were linked to the suspect and his home address, search warrants allowed officials to search the man and his residence.

“Agents conducted the search warrant for Gruenke at the Illinois State Police headquarters in Des Plaines on Wednesday and then conducted the warrant for the residence at his home shortly after,” the Scanner report said.

According to CBS News, the agents found evidence of deleted child porn on the cellphone he was holding at the time, and some of the images were reportedly of children whose ages were around four years old.

“Agents also executed a search warrant at his home, where they found a flash drive containing approximately 200 videos of child pornography, including numerous videos showing children being sexually abused by adults, including children as young as 10,” the CBS article read.

Gruenke, who was arrested Wednesday and placed on administrative leave without pay, is now the subject of an internal investigation by state police and is being held in custody.

Keep reading

Freedom advocates seek judicial review of the Nova Scotia forest ban

The Canadian Constitution Foundation (CCF) is challenging Nova Scotia’s province-wide travel ban on wooded areas. An August 5 proclamation made it illegal to enter any wooded area — including Crown and private land — without a permit, with fines of $25,000 (plus HST).

Freedom advocates wrote to Premier Tim Houston and Natural Resources Minister Tory Rushton on August 6, urging a reconsideration of restrictions, but received no reply. 

The CCF will now seek judicial review and an expedited hearing to challenge the government.

Due to “incredibly dry weather,” Nova Scotia has seen 122 wildfires this year, below the 10-year average of 152. Minister Rushton stated that “only a significant amount of rain” would improve conditions as current fires burn deep underground.

The extensive restrictions under the guise of wildfire prevention include a ban on hiking, fishing, off-road vehicles, and camping outside designated areas. Additionally, forestry, mining, and other industrial work in wooded areas now requires an exemption permit.

Josh Dehaas, author of the August 6 letter, stated the travel ban is “unlawful, disproportionate and unreasonable,” despite the government’s legitimate interest in wildfire prevention.

The Foundation argues that Nova Scotia’s Forests Act unconstitutionally restricts access to “woods” and improperly impacts Charter rights through vague and overbroad imprisonment offences.

Keep reading