Tag: police state

Government asks New Brunswickers to stay out of the woods across province

The New Brunswick government is asking everyone in the province to stay out of the woods. 

As of 12:01 a.m. Sunday, all Crown land is closed. That means no fishing, camping or hiking, no vehicles in the woods. Trail systems are closed and camping is only allowed in campgrounds. 

There is also a ban on all forestry operations such as harvesting, forwarding, skidding, scarification and chipping. 

“Come out of the woods, stay out of the woods until it’s safe for everyone,” Premier Susan Holt said in a Saturday afternoon news conference. 

The new restrictions come as Environment Canada issued heat warnings that are scheduled to last until Wednesday for much of the province. New Brunswick, like the rest of Atlantic Canada, has been dealing with hot, dry weather for weeks. 

The order applies to all forested Crown land, but private landowners are asked to follow the same rules to keep everyone safe. 

Keep reading

Decades Later, It’s Time To Seriously Rethink—And Reduce—The TSA 

As a retired international airline captain, my relationship with the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has been fraught ever since its inception after 9/11. Before that seismic event, I logged countless hours as a Delta Airlines pilot, operating in an environment defined by professionalism and mutual respect among crew, passengers, and airport staff. Today, I view the TSA not as an indispensable pillar of aviation safety, but as an institution whose practices have needlessly burdened travelers and which, after more than two decades, may do more harm than good to the spirit and efficiency of air travel. 

Personal Experience with TSA 

My experiences with TSA have run the gamut: some screeners are cordial and efficient, while others act with indifference—or outright hostility. Despite my decades in aviation, both my wife and I found ourselves subjected to heightened scrutiny and what felt like constant harassment at security checkpoints. This pattern was not isolated to us; colleagues and fellow travelers shared similar frustrations. The inconsistency in treatment reflects deeper problems in TSA’s culture and priorities. 

More troubling is my memory of reporting suspicious activities in airports and on airplanes long before 9/11—concerns that were either ignored or dismissed. In the worst cases, I was treated not as a professional fulfilling a duty of care, but as an alarmist, or, unconscionably, accused of prejudice. These failures of the pre-TSA security apparatus were tragic enough. The answer, however, was not to swing to the other extreme by creating an agency whose methods too often resemble performative security theater rather than effective defense. 

TSA: Record Size, Questionable Effectiveness 

The TSA today is larger, wealthier, and more technologically advanced than at any point in its history: in 2024, it screened over 900 million passengers, processed nearly half a billion checked bags, and employed the largest screening workforce on record.  The agency celebrates its lowered attrition rates, large-scale recruitments, and new technologies, but these metrics only tell part of the story. What goes unaddressed mainly is the pressing question: has all this intrusion, inconvenience, and expense made us significantly safer? 

Keep reading

Brother of Murdered Inmate Alleges FBI Role in OKC Bombing, Waco, and Decades of Domestic Spying, “Justice Will Come From Exposing PATCON”

A newly released book and an upcoming documentary are reviving attention on one of the FBI’s most secretive and controversial domestic spy programs known as “PATCON,” which was unmasked after a 30-year FOIA fight by Utah attorney Jesse Trentadue to prove his brother was murdered while in custody by federal agents in 1995.

Trentadue has uncovered, and is litigating to uncover, a total 2 million pages of documents so far. Two of his seven federal FOIA suits are still ongoing.

Trentadue is still litigating the release of government records from 1995, where his current case involves a request made in 2015 that the FBI sat on for 8 years and refused to respond to, involving records related to federal sting operations involving Timothy McVeigh from before the April 19, 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.

Yet his revealations to date has shown not just government lies about the Oklahoma City bombing, but also a domestic spying and criminal operations that extends into the nation’s newsrooms, courtrooms, centers of power, and more.

Despite new attention on the case and a wave of public interest in PATCON caused by the release of Margaret Roberts’ book “Blowback: The Untold Story of the FBI and the Oklahoma City Bombing” two weeks ago, Trentadue says he does not expect any federal agent or informant to face prosecution for his brother’s killing or for related crimes.

He’s hopeful, rather, that the documented evidence he has uncovered about FBI spying on the political right can be stopped, and that will be the most justice his family will ever find.

Keep reading

Palestinian prisoners ‘electrocuted, starved, and beaten’ in Israeli jails: Detainees commission

A Palestinian rights group on Friday accused Israeli prison authorities of systematically torturing detainees with electric shocks and other forms of abuse, warning of a growing pattern of physical and psychological cruelty, Anadolu reports.

The Palestinian Commission for Detainees and Ex-Detainees Affairs said conditions in northern Israel’s Gilboa Prison have deteriorated significantly, with special units storming prisoner sections under the pretext of inspections.

During these raids, detainees are handcuffed, forcibly removed from their cells, and reportedly subjected to intense beatings and electric shocks, the commission said, citing testimony from a lawyer who recently visited the prison.

Prisoners are allegedly dragged across the wet floors of shower areas, where their soaked clothes and bodies are then targeted with stun guns to amplify the pain.

“The shocks are not only painful but calculated to break the prisoners,” the commission said. “Some have lost consciousness. Others bled from head wounds after being struck with the metal parts of the stun devices.”

The report also described scenes of humiliation, with Israeli guards allegedly laughing as bloodied detainees lay on the ground.

In addition to physical torture, the commission reported severe food deprivation, noting that prisoners are receiving minimal portions, leading to rapid weight loss.

Keep reading

The U.S. Intervenes Against EU Digital Surveillance

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has launched a lobbying campaign against the EU’s Digital Services Act. With this step, Americans have become the last line of defense for the free speech rights of EU citizens.

If, in the past, President Donald Trump often spoke of the European Union as “a tough nut to crack,” he couldn’t have been more accurate. Freedom-loving EU citizens know exactly what he meant. In Brussels, a bizarre mélange of control fetishism, economic dirigisme, and isolation from the outside world has developed — a combination that is no longer tolerable.

Not least, Brussels’s fight against free expression in the digital sphere has revealed the true intentions of the von der Leyen Commission: the recovery of narrative dominance and control over political dissidence — achieved by cold-bloodedly sacrificing citizens’ fundamental freedoms.

U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance already issued multiple warnings in the spring about a European censorship empire. In a speech to the Senate, he denounced European digital legislation as an attack on western liberties. In his address at the Munich Security Conference, he went so far as to suggest cutting ties with the Europeans if they did not reverse their illiberal, dictatorial trajectory.

Criticism Bounces Off

As usual, American criticism fell on deaf ears in Brussels. Although Brussels swallowed the bitter pill of an asymmetrical trade deal with the U.S. two weeks ago, both the hidden protectionism disguised as climate regulation and harmonization standards, as well as the repressive digital laws, remain intact. This is detrimental not only to free speech among Europeans but also for American companies — undoubtedly a key target of the EU censors.

The EU’s discriminatory ambitions through the Digital Services Act (DSA) and the corresponding Digital Markets Act (DMA) primarily target U.S. communication platforms like X, Telegram, and Meta. If these platforms don’t conform to EU rules — granting access to internal communications and aiding Brussels’s surveillance efforts — they face billions in fines.

Much like Britain’s digital ID program, Brussels now masks its shamelessly invasive censorship with claims of youth protection and anti-hate measures. It’s tiresome to hear — but, as always, it’s about “their democracy,” or, to put it more accurately, a massive concrete barrier constructed to shield against the audacious citizen seeking to preserve privacy from an unbounded EU bureaucracy.

Keep reading

Canada’s prime minister tells Canadians to get their news from state-controlled media

In Canada, free speech is no longer a thing.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney utilized an August 5 press conference in British Columbia to dismiss concerns over Liberal legislation (Bill C-18) that would forbid news outlets from sharing news on social media, particularly during emergencies. The Canadian Commie globalist didn’t just refuse to rescind the aforementioned Bill C-18. No siree, he also urged his fellow Canucks to rely on government-funded CBC News for fair and unbiased information.

In light of the fact that heads of government steadfastly refuse to tell the truth, I have taken the liberty to translate Carney’s statement to more accurately reflect his actual meaning and beliefs. It would go: Comrades, trust me, the CBC is a reliable and highly credible news source that is as honest as our glorious revolution is long. And remember, unfettered free speech is the hallmark of a depraved and chaotic society, and invites input from those that don’t value the revolution above all.

This despite the fact that many objective observers deem the CBC to be a propaganda arm of the Liberal Party, from which it receives the vast majority of its funding, similar to the mainstream media’s relationship to the Democrat party in the United States.

But quashing free speech and association isn’t enough for the Carney government. Perish the thought! The ruling Liberal Party is also encouraging “LGBTQI+” refugees to move to Canada by offering them taxpayer-funded income for up to 12 months in addition to various other programs.

Turns out, the Babylon Bee’s allegedly satiric post referencing President Trump’s desire to annex Canada and label it “Gay North Dakota” was spot-on. (Corollary: it’s shocking how many “conspiracy theories” have turned out to be facts.)

So, once again, you have a Western nation trashing its own citizens and traditions in favor of foreigners, especially those with sexual kinks.

Keep reading

UK Government Warns Against VPNs, Caught Using Them Themselves

The UK’s technology secretary urged citizens to think twice before using virtual private networks (VPNs) to bypass the country’s new oppressive online digital ID checks, framing it as a matter of child safety. His comments have landed awkwardly, given that many MPs, including senior ministers, rely on taxpayer-funded VPN subscriptions themselves.

Speaking on BBC Breakfast, Peter Kyle warned: “For everybody out there who’s thinking about using VPNs, let me say this to you directly: verifying your age keeps a child safe. Keeps children safe in our country, so let’s just not try to find a way around.”

Politico reported that official spending records show parliamentarians across party lines have been billing the public for commercial VPN services.

Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds charged taxpayers for a two-year NordVPN subscription in April 2024.

Labour MP Sarah Champion, who in 2022 pressed the government to investigate whether teenage VPN use could undermine online safety rules, also has a subscription on record.

The government says it has no intention of outlawing VPNs but admits it is monitoring how young people use them. This comes after a sharp increase in downloads following the rollout of mandatory digital ID checks under the new censorship law, the Online Safety Act.

For security experts, VPNs are not a subversive tool but a vital one.

The real danger lies in the age verification industry itself.

Keep reading

The Government Seized 7 Horses From a Georgia ‘Urban Cowboy.’ A Court Says He Can Sue.

The Constitution pledges that the government cannot take your property without “just compensation.” So if that happens, and no statute passed by the legislature applies to your specific case, can you sue?

That this is even a question may sound, at a minimum, harebrained. After all, the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. But whether or not that promise—as found in the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause—is effectively an empty one when it is not paired with a relevant law is a matter of active legal debate.

A federal court attempted to answer it last week in a case that hinged on, of all things, a local “urban cowboy.”

Fulton County, Georgia, seized seven horses from Brandon “Brannu” Fulton in 2017 after he was charged with animal cruelty. (The identical last name here is an unfortunate coincidence for the sake of clarity, but we will persevere.) Those charges were later dropped. But the government still declined to return the animals to Fulton—long ago dubbed Atlanta’s Urban Cowboy after his affinity for riding into town on horseback—nor would it compensate him for their value. One of those horses, he said, is worth $35,000.

Fulton (the man, not the county) sued under Section 1983, the federal statute that allows plaintiffs to bring lawsuits against state and local governments for violating their constitutional rights. But his suit was ultimately doomed by the Monell doctrine, which shields municipalities from facing liability for such claims unless a plaintiff can pinpoint an official government policy or custom that caused the alleged violation.

Fulton (the county, not the man) didn’t have an applicable policy. And for procedural reasons, the Urban Cowboy’s claims were barred under state law, as well. So he sought to rein back and redirect his complaint to sue directly under the Takings Clause itself.

In what is somewhat of a seismic opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit said he could. “Our Constitution explicitly promises exactly two remedies: ‘just compensation’ if the government takes our property, and the writ of habeas corpus if it tries to take our lives or liberty,” wrote Judge Robin S. Rosenbaum for the majority. “And the Constitution delivers directly on each. It doesn’t taunt us by naming these remedies but then holding them out of reach, depending on the whims of the legislature.”

Many had hoped the Supreme Court would answer this exact question just last year. In DeVillier v. Texas, the justices heard a case brought by people whose property was damaged after the state constructed highway barriers that diverted massive amounts of floodwater onto their private land. Texas did not contest that the Takings Clause necessitates just compensation for people whose private property is taken by the government. But it promptly had the case moved to federal court, where it argued it could not be sued for damages because Congress has not passed a relevant statute ordering Texas to abide by the Takings Clause.

The 5th Circuit agreed.

The Supreme Court did not. In a unanimous opinion, the justices ruled that the plaintiffs could sue Texas—in state court. Yet while the Court agreed the property owners could invoke a state law cause of action, it did not address the broader dispute over whether a legislative cause of action is required at all. “Our precedents do not cleanly answer the question whether a plaintiff has a cause of action arising directly under the Takings Clause,” wrote Justice Clarence Thomas. “But, this case does not require us to resolve that question.”

Keep reading

Another powerful Democrat nabbed by U.S. Attorney Leah Foley

U.S. Attorney Leah Foley has become the Massachusetts Democratic Party’s worst nightmare.

Foley nabbed yet another powerful Democratic elected official on Friday, indicting longtime Suffolk County Sheriff Steven Tompkins for extorting a Boston cannabis company executive.

Tompkins, who has loomed large on the Boston political scene, allegedly demanded a $50,000 “pre-equity interest” in the cannabis company right before it went public with an IPO, according to Foley’s office.

“His alleged actions are an affront to taxpayers who elected him to his position, and the many dedicated and honest public servants at the Suffolk County Sheriff’s Department,” Foley said in a statement.

Tompkins is the most prominent Democrat in a string of indictments that Foley has secured this year, including Boston City Councilor Tania Fernandes Anderson on a bribery charge and state Rep. Chris Flanagan on wire fraud.

Anderson eventually resigned in disgrace and is awaiting sentencing. Flanagan is still holding on to his seat in the Legislature.

Foley has single-handedly done more damage to the state Democratic Party than the feeble Massachusetts Republican Party.

She has been a breath of fresh air in this politically corrupt state, doing the job because few have the guts to take on the powerful Democratic establishment.

“Public corruption remains a top priority for my administration and we will continue to investigate and prosecute anyone who uses their position of trust and power for their own gain,” Foley said.

Attorney General Andrea Campbell has been a no-show when it comes to prosecuting political corruption, choosing instead to issue frivolous lawsuits against President Donald Trump.

The Tompkins case exposes the continued culture of corruption in Massachusetts politics. It also exposes the corrupt cannabis industry, where a number of politicians have tried to cash in on the lucrative business.

Tompkins’ predecessor in the Sheriff’s office, Andrea Cabral, left to become a top executive for a Boston area cannabis company, Ascend Cannabis, which looms as a likely player in the Tompkins case.

The indictment charges that Tompkins tried to bully a cannabis executive to give him the early $50,000 equity stake in exchange for cooperating in a program the Suffolk Sheriff’s office was participating in with the company. The company was hiring ex-cons from jail to work for the cannabis firm.

The indictment never names the cannabis company or executive, but according to a 2018 story in the Boston Globe, Cabral’s company “plans to work directly with the Suffolk County Sheriff to hire people recently released from jail as workers at its facilities.”

Cabral and Tompkins were also college classmates and close friends, according to the story.

Tompkins “is downright enthusiastic about the partnership,” the fawning Globe story went on to say.

“We’re a nation of second chances, or at least that’s what they used to tell us,” Tompkins was quoted as saying. “If someone who hasn’t had good opportunities in life can catch on and make a decent living? It’s awesome. There’s no squeamishness on my part at all.”

Now we know just why Tompkins wasn’t so “squeamish.” He was allegedly planning to make a pile of cash on the deal as well.

Keep reading

The Government Is Not Your Friend

This week’s guilty verdict for Roman Storm on the count of conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money service business is absolutely insane.

FinCEN, the regulator responsible for licensing, monitoring, and enforcement actions concerning criminal activity in money transmission has itself explicitly stated that self-custodial tooling that facilitates the transmission of value using cryptocurrencies are not money transmitters and are not subject to the relevant regulations.

So, how did we get here? Eight months after the election of a president who describes himself as a Bitcoin and cryptocurrency advocate, after the Department of Justice themselves have explicitly stated that they are not going to engage in regulation by prosecution, or prosecute mixing services, how was Roman Storm found guilty?

There is nothing to describe this situation except pure, unbridled insanity. Incoherence. Hypocrisy and contradiction. There is a lesson here, though, one that I think it’s time more people in this space learn. 

The government’s word is worthless. It means nothing. 

They will continue cracking down on privacy, they will continue pushing KYC surveillance through things like the GENIUS Act and through the backdoor, applying them to just stablecoins (for now). They will continue treating the desire for privacy as evidence of criminal intent. They will do all these things while talking out of the other side of their mouth about supporting Bitcoiners and the “importance of self custody.” 

This is what the government does. This is what politicians do. It is inherent in their very nature. 

We need to stop treating these people as our friends. We need to stop pretending and lying to ourselves that they can be won over and become powerful allies to push the values and tools that we wish to see in the world. They are not our friends. They will not become allies, sharing a common cause with us. They are our enemies. 

It is time to stop pretending. These people must be treated as hostile, and dealt with as such. 

We need to stop begging them for clauses and riders in bills. We need to take them to court. We need to stop kissing their ass and pandering to their egos and notion of public persona. We need to call them out as the two-faced spineless people they are. 

If there is any legitimacy whatsoever to the legal foundations of the United States government, we do not need new laws, we do not need these people’s permission — we have the Constitution. Remind them of that in court. 

If, at the end of all of that, this system is so corrupt and hypocritical that it functionally ignores the constitutional rights of Americans (and non-Americans), then we need to ignore them.

Keep reading