Tag: police state

Australia Bans YouTube for Children Under 16

The government of Australia has reversed its decision to grant YouTube an exemption from its sweeping ban on social media for children under 16. YouTube’s parent company, Google, is threatening legal action, but Australian officials vowed to push ahead with the ban.

“We can’t control the ocean, but we can police the sharks, and that is why we will not be intimidated by legal threats when this is a genuine fight for the wellbeing of Australian kids,” Communications Minister Anika Wells said when Google threatened to sue.

Australia announced its “world-leading” plan to bar children from using social media in November 2024. Despite resistance from Internet freedom advocates, and difficult questions about precisely how such a ban could be implemented, the relevant legislation was quickly passed, and the ban is set to take effect in December 2025.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese gave a press conference on Wednesday in which he pledged to promote Australia’s social media ban to other countries at the United Nations General Assembly in September.

“I know from the discussions I have had with other leaders that they are looking at this and they are considering what impact social media is having on young people in their respective nations, it is a common experience,” Albanese said, appearing with the parents of children who were bullied to death on social media.

“We don’t do this easily. What we do, though, is respond to something that is needed here,” he said.

YouTube was granted an exemption from the ban when it was passed by Parliament in November, for several reasons. One was that YouTube was viewed as an important source of information for teens, so even though it carried potentially harmful content, the good was thought to outweigh the bad.

LGBTQ groups insisted YouTube was an important resource for gay and lesbian children, while public health groups said they used the platform to distribute important information to young people. Australian parents found YouTube less alarming that competing platforms like TikTok. YouTube also featured less direct interaction between users than most of the social media platforms that troubled Australian regulators.

A final objection to banning YouTube was that logging into the service is not required – visitors can access the vast majority of the platform’s content as “guests.” This meant there was no practical way to hold YouTube accountable for policing the age of its users.

Naturally, many of the platforms that were targeted by Australia’s social media ban resented the exemption granted to YouTube. These complaints might have had some bearing on the government’s decision to cancel YouTube’s exemption.

According to Australia’s ABC News, YouTube was added to the social media ban at the request of eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant, who wrote a letter to Wells asking for YouTube’s exemption to be rescinded. Inman Grant said her recommendation was based on a survey of 2,600 children that found nearly 40 percent of them had been exposed to “harmful content” while using YouTube.

Keep reading

This Saturday Marks 88 Years of Federal Marijuana Prohibition — It’s Time To End It

Saturday, August 2nd, marks the 88th anniversary of the signing of the Marihuana Tax Act, the first federal marijuana prohibition law.

Since its inception, the criminalization of the marijuana plant and the stigmatization of those who consume it has been predicated almost entirely upon the promotion of gross exaggerations, racial stereotypes, and outright lies.

For instance, a July 6, 1927 story in the New York Times, headlined “Mexican Family Goes Insane,” farcically claimed: “A widow and her four children have been driven insane by eating the marihuana plant, according to doctors, who say there is no hope of saving the children’s lives and that the mother will be insane for the rest of her life.”

An academic paper titled “Marijuana,” published in 1933 in The Journal of Law and Criminology, similarly made over-the-top allegations about the plant’s supposed dangers. The authors wrote, “The inevitable result [of consuming cannabis] is insanity, which those familiar with it describe as absolutely incurable, and, without exception ending in death.”

In 1937, Harry J. Anslinger — America’s first ‘Drug Czar’ — lobbied Congress to ban cannabis nationwide. He did so over the staunch objections of the American Medical Association, which disputed the government’s false claims that cannabis use invariably induced violence, insanity, and death. Undeterred by the AMA’s opposition, Anslinger relied almost entirely upon racist rhetoric to persuade lawmakers. “There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the U.S., and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana use,” he asserted. “This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others.”

Fast-forward to 1971. That’s when the Nixon administration declared drug abuse to be “public enemy number one.” The lynchpin of this campaign was stamping out the use marijuana, which Congress had just classified as a Schedule I controlled substance — the strictest federal category available. Yet, privately, Nixon acknowledged that he did not think cannabis was “particularly dangerous,” and he lamented the “ridiculous” penalties faced by those arrested for possessing it.

Nonetheless, his administration publicly doubled down on the mythical marijuana threat for its own political gain. As his domestic policy chief, John Ehrlichman, later acknowledged, “We couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the (Vietnam) war or Black,” but we could get “the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and Blacks with heroin.”

By “criminalizing both heavily,” Ehrlichman explained, “we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news.”

“Did we know we were lying about the drugs?” he asked. “Of course we did.”

Keep reading

Why the UK’s age verification system (probably) won’t work

On Friday, the “Age Verification” clause of the UK’s Online Safety Act officially came into force. The result was a sudden surge in discussion, and a lot of people realising – finally – what the law really means.

People have been googling “VPN” a lot. That’s a good thing; we’ll get to why later.

Unfortunately, much of this is stable doors and bolted horses. We’ve been warning about the OSA since it was first mooted (by the Conservatives, just to remind you that “sides” are an illusion), and we’re rather past the point where awareness would have mattered.

The new law essentially forces companies to put any even potentially “adult content” behind an ID wall – meaning a user must prove their age before they access it. The ways of doing that vary; you can use a credit card or let an AI-powered system scan your face via webcam to guess your age.

Don’t worry, it won’t store the data, and it’s only guessing your age, not scanning your face and uploading it to some data storage centre. They promised they wouldn’t do that.

The really vital part here is what exactly “adult content” means. It evokes – and is indeed intended to evoke – pornography. The act was sold as a tool to prevent children from accessing the near-infinite amounts of porn scattered across the web, but pornography is the least of it.

“Adult content” can also mean violence, suicide, animal cruelty, war, drugs…or any news coverage and/or discussion of the same. It could also mean “conspiracy theories”, especially those which could “expose children to harm”, like anti-vaccine sentiment, or cause “radicalization”.

In fact, it can potentially mean anything it is required to mean, which is exactly the kind of thing they LOVE to put in new laws.

But I don’t want to rehash these points here. You can read our previous coverage of it HERE HERE HERE and HERE.

Today I want to talk about how the OSA is going to spread, and why it might not matter if it does.

Over the weekend, it was widely noted on Twitter/X that Elon Musk’s platform was putting EU-based users behind the age restriction, not just British ones. People made jokes that the US-based platform couldn’t differentiate between the UK and Europe.

Far more likely, they are preparing for when the EU launches its own age verification scheme in the near future.

Keep reading

Israel ‘freezes’ plans for concentration camp in southern Gaza: Report

Israel’s so-called “Humanitarian City” project, which was planned to be established on the ruins of the city of Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip, has been frozen, Israeli media reported on 28 July.

“There is no decision to proceed with this, and there is no alternative plan. The political echelon was certain it was heading toward a hostage deal that included withdrawals in the southern Gaza Strip, so it seems they’ve abandoned this initiative – it’s on hold for now,” a senior security source told Yedioth Ahronoth.

The project, described as a concentration camp in Palestinian and Israeli media, was intended to forcibly displace hundreds of thousands of Palestinians to an isolated area near the Egyptian border. Gathering Palestinians there is seen as a first step to ethnically cleansing Gaza and forcing millions of Palestinians to flee to foreign countries as refugees.

Rather than fight Hamas, Israeli forces in Gaza are exerting most of their effort and resources to demolishing homes, residential buildings, and infrastructure to ensure displaced Palestinians have nowhere to return to.

The “Humanitarian City” project aimed to initially force some 600,000 Palestinians into an area between the Philadelphi and Morag axes on the ruins of Rafah.

Military reports estimated that its completion would take at least a year, which angered the Israeli cabinet.

The decision comes as Israel continues to severely restrict aid reaching Gaza, causing starvation and famine in the strip to worsen as a result.

Keep reading

Lawyer Suing Gates & Bourla for Covid VAX Injuries Arrested and Imprisoned in Netherlands

In a stunning expression of the Globalist-Fascist takeover of the Netherlands, the Netherlands police have arrested Arno van Kessel, the lead attorney suing Bill Gates, Albert Bourla, Mark Rutte et al. for COVID-19 vaccine injuries.

The civil process was scheduled to begin on July 9; Mr. van Kessel was arrested in a Gestapo-reminiscent early morning raid by paramilitary police on June 11, where he was reportedly blindfolded, bound, and taken into detention, where he remains almost two months later.

Readers will note my tardiness in reporting this stunning story. The reason is because both the European and the American press have completely ignored both the civil trial against Gates, Bourla, Rutte et al. and van Kessel’s arrest.

I knew nothing about van Kessel’s arrest until last night, when my co-author, Dr. Peter McCullough, forwarded to me a report by INFOWARS journalist, Adan Salazar. Once again, the so-called “conspiracy theorist” Alex Jones has proven to be one of the first guys to report the shocking reality of what is going on.

Salazar’s report prompted me to do a Google Netherlands search with the key words Arno van Kessel gearresteerd — that is, “Arno van Kessel arrested”—and I got one search result for a June 27 report in an independent online journal called Der Andere Krant (The Other Newspaper). The following is an English translation.

Arno van Kessel will be held in custody for an additional ninety days because the Public Prosecution Service continues to designate him as a “suspect in an investigation into a criminal network,” yet without presenting any evidence. This means the Leeuwarden lawyer will definitely not be present at the public hearing on July 9th in the Leeuwarden District Court, where the first substantive hearing in the internationally high-profile case against, among others, the State of the Netherlands, Mark Rutte, and Bill Gates is scheduled. His partner, Peter Stassen, is on his own, but says he will “appear fully equipped.”

In early June, this newspaper reported that there was finally some progress in the internationally high-profile lawsuit by Leeuwarden lawyer Arno van Kessel https://deanderekrant.nl/nieuw-hoofdstuk-in-rechtszaak-tegen-bill-gates-en-mark-rutte/and his Eindhoven colleague Peter Stassen. In 2023, the legal duo announced they would file legal proceedings against Bill Gates, Mark Rutte, and the Dutch State, among others. On behalf of their clients, they want to force the judge to issue a clear ruling on the question: was the COVID-19 mRNA injection a vaccine for the benefit of the population’s health, or a bioweapon? Van Kessel said: “It’s one or the other, and there’s no in between.”

The Northern Netherlands District Court, Leeuwarden location, announced in early June 2025 – finally – that the first substantive hearing of the case is scheduled for July 9th. On Wednesday morning, June 11th, there was a completely unexpected turn of events. Arno van Kessel was dragged from his bed early in the morning by a special intervention team with a considerable display of force. The lawyer, his daughter, and his wife were even briefly held at gunpoint.

A day later, the police published a report on the website politie.nl linking Van Kessel to “a criminal network.” According to a press release issued by the Public Prosecution Service, eight people were arrested that morning for “adhering to anti-institutional ideology and possibly intending to use violence.” One of them was quickly released, while the other seven were held in restricted custody for two weeks, meaning the suspects were not allowed any contact with the outside world. Van Kessel – as was announced last week – was being held in a cell in Vught.

In recent weeks, several stories have appeared in the mainstream media about a network of so-called sovereigns. These “anti-institutionalists” may have been planning something related to the NATO summit. Weapons and explosives may have been found, but any hard evidence or substantiation remains lacking to this day. The suggestion that Van Kessel is also part of a dangerous criminal group has been raised. The charges have since been partially withdrawn. The AD newspaper reported last week that the Public Prosecution Service has been unable to substantiate a plan to disrupt the NATO summit. “We have investigated whether there is an imminent threat. This has not been proven.”

On Thursday, June 26, the Public Prosecution Service released more news after a long silence. One suspect has been released, but “six suspects in the investigation into a criminal network, in which a large proportion of the arrested suspects espouse anti-institutional ideology and may have the intention to use violence, will remain in custody for an additional 90 days,” the Public Prosecution Service announced. Van Kessel is one of those suspects who will remain in custody for another 90 days. The Public Prosecution Service states that it needs more time for the investigation and that “given the state of the investigation, it is not possible to respond substantively to questions about the progress, suspicions, and findings,” according to the Public Prosecution Service.

Keep reading

Illegal immigrant caught working as police officer in Maine while attempting to buy firearm

Federal immigration agents collared a Jamaican national who managed to get himself hired as a cop in Maine — despite being in the country illegally, Immigration and Customs Enforcement announced Monday.

Jamaican migrant Jon Luke Evans, who was employed as a reserve police officer with the Old Orchard Beach Police Department, illegally attempted to buy a gun. He was arrested in Biddeford on Friday, according to ICE.

ICE said Evans was also issued a gun by the police department.

“The fact that a police department would hire an illegal alien and unlawfully issue him a firearm while on duty would be comical if it weren’t so tragic,” ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations Boston acting Field Office Director Patricia H. Hyde said.

“We have a police department that was knowingly breaking the very law they are charged with enforcing in order to employ an illegal alien. ICE Boston will continue to prioritize public safety by arresting and removing criminal alien threats from our New England communities,” Hyde added.

While Evans entered the US legally by flying into the Miami National Airport on Sept. 24, 2023, he overstayed his visa by nearly two years, ICE said. He was supposed to leave on October 1, 2023, but never did.

Evans joined the police force in May as a seasonal officer, the Old Orchard Beach Police Department told Fox News Digital. As part of his hiring process, Evans underwent a background check, physical and medical screenings and law enforcement training.

Keep reading

Airlines urge senators to reject bill limiting facial recognition

A group representing several major airlines alongside travel companies and airports is opposing a Senate bill that would require the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to generally use manual ID verification at security checkpoints instead of facial recognition.

The bill, introduced by Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), would broadly restrict TSA’s ability to use biometrics and facial recognition, carving out a few exemptions for the agency’s PreCheck and other Trusted Traveler programs. Passengers may still opt in to the use of facial recognition at the checkpoint.

In a letter Monday to Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), the air industry groups said the law was a “step backward” and that facial recognition technology made security screenings far more efficient.

“The future of seamless and secure travel relies on the appropriate use of this technology to ensure security effectiveness and operational efficiency as daily travel volume continues to rise,” they wrote. “We are concerned that the vague and confusing exceptions to this blanket ban will have major consequences for the identity verification process, screening operations, and trusted traveler enrollment programs.”

Cruz and Cantwell are their parties’ highest-ranking members of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, which is scheduled to mark up the bill Wednesday.

In addition to limiting the use of facial recognition, Merkley’s bill would also require TSA to delete most images collected at checkpoints within 24 hours of a passenger’s departure.

Travelers going through a TSA checkpoint are generally able to opt out of facial recognition, the agency says. Merkley has argued the agency’s enforcement is inconsistent, posting on social media in February about his difficulties navigating the policy at Reagan Washington National Airport.

“This is big government coming to take away your privacy, trying to set up a national surveillance system,” the Oregon Democrat said in February. 

The airlines, however, warned that restricting the use of facial recognition could slow down security and divert TSA’s resources toward maintaining officer staffing, rather than focusing on automated innovations. The group also said it felt it had been insufficiently consulted on the legislation, “despite the major impact the bill would have on aviation security, airports, airlines, travelers, and technology companies.”

Keep reading

The FBI Took Her $40,000 Without Explaining Why. She Fought Back Against That Practice—and Lost.

Linda Martin found out the hard way that the most powerful law enforcement agency in the U.S.—the FBI—can seize your assets without articulating why. Worse: Law enforcement took her savings in a raid that was itself unconstitutional. Worse still: A lawsuit she filed met its demise last week, allowing the federal government to continue the dubious practice of taking people’s valuables without having to explain the reason it is justified in doing so.

The agency never did furnish a specific reason in Martin’s case—because she wasn’t charged with a crime. Her saga began in 2021, when the FBI sought to take more than $100 million in assets from U.S. Private Vaults, a business that offered safe-deposit boxes. That company was suspected of, and ultimately charged with, criminal wrongdoing. But the warrant expressly forbade agents from engaging in a “criminal search or seizure” of customers’ boxes, like Martin’s.

They did so anyway, rummaging through approximately 800 of them and seizing assets that belonged to a slew of innocent people. That included Travis May, who stored gold and $63,000 in cash; Jeni Verdon-Pearsons and Michael Storc, who kept $2,000 in cash, as well as approximately $20,000 worth of silver; Paul and Jennifer Snitko, whose box contained personal items, like marriage, birth, and baptismal certificates; and Don Mellein, who had invested in gold coins, many of which the FBI said it lost (to the tune of over $100,000).

A judge later ruled violated the Fourth Amendment. But it was too late for Martin, who received notice that the FBI had taken $40,200, her life savings, from her box. To justify that, the notice listed hundreds of federal crimes that would lead to a seizure. As Institute for Justice (I.J.) Director of Media Relations Andrew Wimer points out, the list included such crimes as copyright infringement and barring business deals with North Korea. But the bureau notably did not specify how Martin was supposedly involved in any of those offenses, because it is not required to do so.

So she sued. “When the FBI attempts to forfeit someone’s property, due process requires that it say why, citing specific facts and laws,” reads her appellant brief. “By sending notices that initiate and, often, consummate property’s forfeiture—all without ever saying what exactly the FBI thinks justifies the forfeiture, the FBI deprives owners of crucial information they need to protect their rights.” After she filed the lawsuit, and about two years post-seizure, the agency returned Martin’s cash. But she continued in court in hopes that the judiciary would agree that the FBI was violating people’s due process rights by seizing assets with effectively no explanation.

That died last week, when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia dismissed the suit for lack of jurisdiction.

Keep reading

California Moves to Ban Hemp Wellness Products — And the Weed Nuns Are Fighting Back

California’s Department of Public Health is pushing a new rule — and the timing couldn’t be worse.

A proposed regulation, known as DPH-24-005, would dramatically restrict access to hemp-derived wellness products across the state. The rule aims to prohibit the sale of any hemp topical, capsule, or tincture with more than trace amounts of THC (including naturally occurring Delta-9), even if federally legal and non-intoxicating. Critics say it would wipe out entire categories of hemp products — from calming balms to sleep aids — and gut small, community-driven businesses in the process.

One of the most vocal opponents? The Sisters of the Valley — better known as the “Weed Nuns” — a group of spiritual, feminist cannabis growers based in Merced County.

A Ban That Hits Small Operators Hard

“This is the Public Health Department caving to the dispensary lobby and consolidating the market further than they already have. This is a direct hit to small farms and small operators,” the Sisters warn.

According to the Sisters, the rule would criminalize their signature offerings: non-intoxicating, CBD-rich salves and oils crafted by hand in their small-scale, women-run operation. They argue that DPH-24-005 threatens not just their livelihood, but also consumer access to safe, plant-based alternatives.

They’re not alone. Dozens of California hemp farmers, herbalists, and activists are mobilizing to oppose the measure, saying it caters to the interests of cannabis corporations looking to eliminate competition from the hemp side of the market.

A Moment to Speak Out

A public hearing on the rule will be held via Zoom on Sunday, July 28, 2025, at 10:00 AM Pacific. Anyone in California — and beyond — can participate, and written comments will be accepted until July 30.

The Sisters have launched a campaign urging Californians to show up, speak out, and submit public comments before it’s too late.

“We ask our customers and fans to stand with us,” they wrote. “Not because we need more sales. But because the people’s medicine should not be outlawed by corporate lobbying.”

Keep reading

German Police Raid AfD MEP’s Property For The 22nd Time

German police have raided Alternative for Germany (AfD) MEP Petr Bystron’s property for the 22nd time, using the pretext of his connection to the defunct Voice of Europe website, which was run by a man exiled from Ukraine.

The house raid came while Bystron was in Washington D.C., meeting with Trump officials, including congressmen and allies of President Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance.

On early Tuesday morning, German police searched an older warehouse where Bystron conducted business a decade ago.

“This is targeted terror against the opposition,” Bystron said in a press release. “There is no other way to classify the absurd behavior of the authorities.”

Bystron was the target of Czech intelligence services last year, who decided to release a variety of allegations surrounding their investigation at a rather opportune time—right before EU parliamentary elections. The raid against Voice of Europe (VoE) and the accusations against Bystron, which Remix News covered, was widely seen as damaging the AfD’s reputation before voters headed to the polls.

Notably, Czech intelligence claimed to have voice recordings that revealed Bystron was involved with a scheme to provide politicians with money in exchange for conducting interviews with the outlet VoE.

The Czech authorities have never made the recording of Bystron public despite demands from the AfD to release it. Nobody has ever been charged to date in connection with the allegations, including Bystron himself. Bystron, however, was the only name that was released in connection with the case, although authorities claimed six European politicians received money from VoE.

The raid against Bystron may be seen as especially provocative as it was conducted at a time when Bystron was out of the country and meeting with Trump officials and congressmen. He is seen as the AfD party’s key bridge to American policymakers and is known for his connections to the Republican Party.

Bystron himself said that despite his properties being raided 21 times, the police have not turned up any incriminating information against him.

He also said that the police have even raided his elderly mother’s room in her retirement home and took testimony from her, despite her having been officially declared by the court as a dementia patient.

“Every single one of these 22 searches was illegal. Each one marks a step away from a democratic constitutional state and toward an authoritarian regime that seeks to silence dissent by any means necessary,” Bystron told the Gateway Pundit.

Keep reading