Tag: police state

‘The Agenda: their Vision, Your Future’: The digital prison that awaits us all

“The prophecies made in 1931 [in ‘Brave New World’] are coming true much sooner than I thought they would … The nightmare of total organisation … has emerged … and is now awaiting us, just around the next corner.”—Aldous Huxley, Brave New World Revisited, 1958

‘The Agenda: Their Vision, Your Future’ is a feature-length independent documentary produced by Mark Sharman; former UK broadcasting executive at ITV and Sky (formerly BSkyB).

In fiction and fact, there have always been people and organisations with ambitions to control the world. And now the oligarchs who pull the strings of finance and power finally have the tools to achieve their global objectives; omnipresent surveillance, artificial intelligence, digital currency and ultimately digital identities. The potential for social control of our lives and minds is alarmingly real.

The plan has been decades in the making and has seen infiltration of Governments, local councils, big business, civil society, the media and, crucially, education. A ceaseless push for a new reality, echoing Aldous Huxley’s ‘Brave New World’, or George Orwell’s ‘1984’.

‘The Agenda: Their Vision, Your Future’ examines the digital prison which awaits us if we do not push back right now. How your food, energy, money, travel and even your access to the internet could be limited and controlled; how financial power is strangling democracy and how global institutions like the World Health Organisation are commandeered to champion ideological and fiscal objectives.

The centrepiece is man-made climate change and with it, the race to Net Zero. Both are encapsulated in the United Nations and its Agenda 2030. A force for good? Or “a blank cheque for totalitarian global control”?

The Agenda presents expert views from the UK, the USA and Europe.

Keep reading

Irish Government Admits No Free Speech Impact Assessment for “Misinformation” Laws

Irish authorities have moved ahead with extensive legislation aimed at tackling “misinformation,” yet they have not examined whether such measures might undermine free expression. The Department responsible for communications, media, and environmental policy has acknowledged that no analysis has been carried out to assess the consequences for free speech.

Responding to a media query from Gript, the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications plainly admitted: “The Department has not undertaken any analysis or research on the potential impact of mis/disinformation laws on free speech.”

Despite this lack of evaluation, the government continues to defend its strategy. Speaking outside Government Buildings, Taoiseach (Prime Minster) Micheál Martin insisted the effort to curb online falsehoods is justified, arguing that some speech doesn’t merit protection. “It’s not freedom of speech, really, when it’s just a blatant lie and untruth, which can create a lot of public disquiet, as we have seen,” he said.

Martin downplayed the idea that regulating disinformation represents any serious threat to expressive freedoms, stating: “There are very strong protections in our constitution and in our laws and freedom of speech.” He added, “I wouldn’t overstate the impact on clamping down on blatant lies online as a sort of incursion or an undermining of freedom of speech.”

When pressed on whether the absence of impact studies was irresponsible, Martin referenced a recent RTÉ radio segment about social media claims related to a shooting in Carlow. “There was a researcher on identifying the blatant misinformation on truths and lies surrounding what happened in Carlow,” he said. “So I do think it’s absolutely important that government focuses on this issue.”

Keep reading

Weaponized sugar pill? Homeland ends controversial and costly Quiet Skies domestic spying program

On Thursday, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced via social media that the Transportation Safety Administration (TSA) is ending the pricey and oft-politicized Quiet Skies program.

“Today, I’m announcing TSA is ending the Quiet Skies Program, which since its existence has failed to stop a SINGLE terrorist attack while costing US taxpayers roughly $200 million a year,” she wrote in a press release.  

The Quiet Skies program, an initiative that began in 2010 and was officially launched in 2012 by the TSA, has sparked debate over its secretive monitoring of domestic air travelers deemed to be potential security risks. 

Originally intended to identify and track individuals who may pose threats to aviation, the program relied on behavioral analysis and data collection, often without passengers’ knowledge. Critics have long argued it raised privacy concerns and lacked transparency, while supporters have claimed it was a vital tool for ensuring safety in an era of evolving security challenges.

Agency used program as political tool

Noem went on to say, “DHS and TSA have uncovered documents, correspondence, and timelines that clearly highlight the inconsistent application of Quiet Skies. The program, under the guise of “national security,” was used to target political opponents and benefit political allies of the Biden Administration.” 

Noem also said that she is calling for a full Congressional investigation to examine corruption within the program.

Perhaps the most well-known case is that of Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard. Gabbard, a decorated Army Reserve veteran who served in Iraq and Kuwait, and was later elected to the House of Representatives from Hawaii, was placed on the program’s watchlist in July 2024, prompting widespread controversy over allegations of political retaliation. 

Gabbard said on X that “I was put on a secret terror watch list after I publicly criticized [Kamala Harris]. No one will be safe from political retaliation under a Harris administration. I put my life on the line for this country. Now the government calls me a terror threat.”

Keep reading

Palantir’s Value Soars With Dystopian Spy Tool that Will Centralize Data on Americans

During an end-of-year investor call this February, Palantir CEO, co-founder and militant Zionist Alex Karp bragged that his company was making a financial killing by enabling mass murder.

“Palantir is here to disrupt and make the institutions we partner with the very best in the world and, when it’s necessary, to scare enemies,” he stated, adding: “And on occasion, kill them.”  

On this front, Karp claimed Palantir was “crushing it,” and he professed to be “super-proud of the role we play, especially in places we can’t talk about.” 

Karp went on to predict social “disruption” ahead that would be “very good for Palantir.”

“There’s a revolution. Some people are going to get their heads cut off,” he warned, suggesting that his firm was producing the most vital technology enabling elites to restore control during the coming unrest.

Denver-based Palantir [which specializes in software platforms for big-data analytics] is already playing a decisive role in the besieged Gaza Strip, where its products assist Israel’s application of a ferocious AI targeting system known as Lavender which directs its ongoing genocide.

In the face of public protest, Karp has acknowledged that he is directly involved in killing Palestinians in Gaza, but insisted the dead were “mostly terrorists.”

Keep reading

Key GOP Congressmen, Including Pro-Marijuana Legalization Member, Defend Effort to Ban Consumable Hemp Products

Key GOP congressional lawmakers—including one member who supports marijuana legalization—don’t seem especially concerned about provisions in a new spending bill that would put much of the hemp industry in jeopardy by banning most consumable products derived from the plant.

In interviews with Marijuana Moment, Congressional Cannabis Caucus co-chair Rep. Dave Joyce (R-OH) and House Agriculture Committee Chairman Glen Thompson (R-PA), as well as Rep. Lou Correa (D-CA), weighed in on the hemp language in the large-scale bill that cleared the the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies on Thursday.

Under the measure, hemp would be redefined under federal statute in a way that would prohibit cannabis products containing any “quantifiable” amount of THC or “any other cannabinoids that have similar effects (or are marketed to have similar effects) on humans or animals” as THC.

While Joyce backs legalizing and regulating cannabis for adult use, he said the language from the 2018 Farm Bill that federally legalized hemp and its derivatives “has been the stepping stone for the gas station delivery of intoxicants, whether that’s hemp or chemically manufactured [products] or whatever other shit it is that they sell at gas stations.”

“And there’s no age limit on it. So you’re handcuffing the regular cannabis industry that has strict standards that they have to meet everywhere, and yet this industry has flourished,” he said, adding that problems with the current law have been “exacerbated by people because there are some allegations that [intoxicating hemp products are] cannabis. It’s not hemp anymore.”

The congressman also seemed to endorse a push in Ohio to make it so intoxicating hemp products could only be sold to adults at licensed marijuana dispensaries. He said he told Gov. Mike DeWine (R) that, regardless of his views on the issue, the problem is the “gas station stuff that the kids are getting that all these people are up in arms about.”

That said, Joyce said while he does feel the 2018 Farm Bill’s hemp provisions included a “loophole” that’s been exploited, he hasn’t read the text of the latest legislation yet.

“I’m all for regulating the industry… It has to be regulated so that only adults are getting it,” he said.

Keep reading

Trump’s Palantir-Powered Surveillance Is Turning America Into A Digital Prison

“We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission.” — Ayn Rand

Call it what it is: a panopticon presidency.

President Trump’s plan to fuse government power with private surveillance tech to build a centralized, national citizen database is the final step in transforming America from a constitutional republic into a digital dictatorship armed with algorithms and powered by unaccountable, all-seeing artificial intelligence.

This isn’t about national security. It’s about control.

According to news reports, the Trump administration is quietly collaborating with Palantir Technologies—the data-mining behemoth co-founded by billionaire Peter Thiel—to construct a centralized, government-wide surveillance system that would consolidate biometric, behavioral, and geolocation data into a single, weaponized database of Americans’ private information.

This isn’t about protecting freedom. It’s about rendering freedom obsolete.

What we’re witnessing is the transformation of America into a digital prison—one where the inmates are told we’re free while every move, every word, every thought is monitored, recorded, and used to assign a “threat score” that determines our place in the new hierarchy of obedience.

This puts us one more step down the road to China’s dystopian system of social credit scores and Big Brother surveillance.

The tools enabling this all-seeing surveillance regime are not new, but under Trump’s direction, they are being fused together in unprecedented ways—with Palantir at the center of this digital dragnet.

Palantir, long criticized for its role in powering ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) raids and predictive policing, is now poised to become the brain of Trump’s surveillance regime.

Under the guise of “data integration” and “public safety,” this public-private partnership would deploy AI-enhanced systems to comb through everything from facial recognition feeds and license plate readers to social media posts and cellphone metadata—cross-referencing it all to assess a person’s risk to the state.

Keep reading

OpenAI Is Ordered to Save Every ChatGPT Chat — Even the Ones You Delete

A federal court order requiring OpenAI to retain all ChatGPT conversations, including those users have deleted, should strong concern among privacy advocates and added pressure to a growing legal battle over the use of copyrighted material in AI systems.

On May 13, US Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang directed OpenAI to “preserve and segregate all output log data that would otherwise be deleted on a going-forward basis until further order of the Court.” Although the order was issued several weeks ago, it only came to wider attention this week as OpenAI began taking formal steps to challenge it.

The ruling stems from multiple lawsuits filed by media organizations, including The New York Times, that accuse OpenAI of unlawfully using their copyrighted content to train and operate ChatGPT.

In response, OpenAI submitted a filing urging US District Judge Sidney H. Stein to overturn what it described as a “sweeping, unprecedented order.”

The company argued that the directive forces it to ignore user choices about data deletion, jeopardizing the privacy of millions. OpenAI also pointed to a statement from The New York Times editorial board asserting that Americans “should be able to control what happens to their personal data.”

Keep reading

State criminalizes political memes, gets sued by popular satire site

The Babylon Bee, a popular satire website, has filed a lawsuit against the state of Hawaii challenging a state law that censors online content, “including political satire and parody.”

An announcement from the ADF, which is representing the publication as well as a Hawaii resident in the case, said, “The law violates fundamental free speech and due process rights by using vague and overbroad standards to punish people for posting certain political content online, including political memes and parodies of politicians.”

The ADF explained Gov. Josh Green signed S2687 into law in July 2024, and it bans the distribution of “materially deceptive media” that portrays politicians in a way that risks harming “the reputation or electoral prospects of a candidate.”

Further, the state forces satire artists to post disclaimers, destroying the purpose of satire.

“Hawaii’s war against political memes and satire is censorship, pure and simple,” said ADF lawyer Mathew Hoffmann. “Satire has served as an important vehicle to deliver truth with a smile for centuries, and this kind of speech receives the utmost protection under the Constitution. The First Amendment doesn’t allow Hawaii to choose what political speech is acceptable, and we are urging the court to cancel this unnecessary censorship.”

Seth Dillon, chief of the Bee, said, “We’re used to getting pulled over by the joke police, but comedy isn’t a crime. The First Amendment protects our right to tell jokes, whether it’s election season or not. We’ll never stop fighting to defend that freedom.”

Keep reading

BC nurse Amy Hamm faces over $160,000 in legal fees, 3-month license suspension after being found guilty of ‘unprofessional conduct’

Vancouver nurse Amy Hamm, who was found guilty of professional misconduct by a disciplinary panel of the British Columbia College of Nurses and Midwives in March, is facing over $160,000 in legal fees and a potential three-month suspension of her license. 

In late May, British Columbia College of Nurses and Midwives (BCCNM) attorney Michael Seaborn sent a request to the group’s disciplinary panel urging them to suspend her license for three months and order her to pay $163,053 in legal fees to the BCCNM.

Hamm wrote in response to the filing that the BCCNM “spent 4+ years persecuting me for my political views. Their latest move is to try to take $163,053 dollars from me, a single mother, to pay for their bullsh*t persecution that I wanted nothing to do with. And suspend my license for 3 months. I already lost my 13 year job because of them. They are f*cking evil. Evil. Who does this?”

In a statement to the Epoch Times, BCCNM spokesperson Johanna Ward said that the request is part of the regulatory disciplinary process. “Costs may be awarded to the successful party, in this case the College, to partially offset the cost of running a hearing. The College has made its submissions to the Discipline Committee regarding the penalty and costs sought. Ms. Hamm and her counsel have the opportunity to respond to those submissions. Ultimately, the Discipline Committee will decide what, if any, order to make on penalty and costs.”

In a June 2 post, Hamm said she would fight the request. “Unfortunately for them, I am not a weak person. I reject their lies, and their punishment, and will fight to see that they never see a penny of the $161,000 they want to take from me. I will fight to see that they are punished for what they’ve done.”

The case against Hamm spans back to 2020, when Hamm co-sponsored a billboard that read “I [heart] JK Rowling,” the British author best known for her Harry Potter series who has been a vocal defender of women’s spaces. A complaint was lodged against Hamm with the BCCNM claiming that she was transphobic and unfit for her profession. A second complaint, filed anonymously, was filed against Hamm accusing her of “promoting and stoking hate speech towards trans and gender-diverse communities.” 

The BCCNM’s Inquiry Committee launched an investigation, resulting in a 332-page report on Hamm’s online activities and a citation against Hamm for alleged “discriminatory and derogatory statements” that constituted professional misconduct.

In March, Hamm was found guilty of committing “unprofessional conduct” for her statements in support of sex being a characteristic that cannot be changed, statements in which she identified herself as a nurse. 

Keep reading