Student Visa Applicants Will Now Be Forced To Make Their Social Media Accounts Public

In a Monday announcement, several U.S. embassies stated that student visa applicants will be required to turn the settings on their social media accounts to “public” in order to facilitate scrutiny of their posts, presumably for ideological screening. The change is part of a recent string of crackdowns on international students, which has targeted many who have participated in pro-Palestinian protests or expressed anti-Israel views.

In a social media post, the U.S. Embassy in London wrote that “every visa adjudication is a national security decision,” adding that applicants for several kinds of student visas would be required to “adjust the privacy settings on all of their personal social media accounts to ‘public’ to facilitate vetting necessary to establish their identity and admissibility to the United States.” Several other embassy social media accounts also posted the statement.

The directive comes after months of ramped-up efforts to ideologically filter prospective international students. Earlier this year, Secretary of State Marco Rubio began canceling the visas of some college students who participated in anti-Israel protests—or, in one student’s case, simply wrote an op-ed. In one March press conference, he estimated that his office had canceled more than 300 visas.

“Every time I find one of these lunatics, I take away their visa.” Rubio said. “At some point, I hope we run out because we’ve gotten rid of all of them, but, we’re looking every day for these lunatics that are tearing things up.”

A domestic cable sent to embassy officials in May telegraphed this latest development, ordering officials to scour social media posts from prospective Harvard students, noting that the order “will also serve as a pilot for expanded screening and vetting of visa applicants” and “will be expanded over time.” Last week, additional policy updates directed embassy officials to review F, M, and J visas (which are common student visas) for “any indications of hostility toward the citizens, culture, government, institutions or founding principles of the United States.”

This latest move in the Trump administration’s mission to prevent students with disfavored views from studying in the U.S. is nothing less than outright viewpoint discrimination. While the U.S. has a national security interest in vetting visa applicants for affiliations with outright terrorist groups, merely opposing Israel’s actions in Gaza hardly approaches that line. And, as many free speech advocates have pointed out, this precedent can easily be utilized to punish many other viewpoints.

“There is nothing stopping this or another administration from using that authority tomorrow against critics of other countries, whether they’re protesting Russia’s invasion of Ukraine or China’s oppression of Uyghurs,” reads a recent statement from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), a First Amendment group. “That’s wrong. Requiring foreign students and faculty to self-censor their views about American foreign policy in order to stay in the country violates American principles of free speech and the First Amendment.”

Keep reading

Venezuelan influencer killed after accusing the Tren de Aragua and naming High-Ranking Chavismo officials.

On the night of June 22, riel Jesús Sarmiento Rodríguez, a brave 25-year-old Venezuelan influencer, was brutally murdered in his home in El Piñonal, Maracay, while livestreaming on TikTok.

Jesús Sarmiento Rodríguez, a brave 25-year-old Venezuelan influencer, was brutally murdered in his home in El Piñonal, Maracay, while livestreaming on TikTok.

Two armed men broke into his home, shooting him at least nine times and seriously injuring his mother with a shot to the abdomen. The crime, captured in real time, has shocked Venezuela and exposes the rot of a system where organized crime and political power appear deeply intertwined.

Sarmiento, known on TikTok as @unleacks, was a programmer and cybersecurity analyst who used his platform with 80,000 followers to denounce police corruption and the links between Chavista regime officials and criminal gangs such as the Tren de Aragua and the Tren del Llano.

Keep reading

Transgender TikToker Goes Viral for Urging Followers to ‘Get a Gun’ and Kill ICE Agents

A transgender TikToker, who is a biological female, has gone viral for urging her followers to “get a gun” and kill Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.

The far-left TikToker, who goes by the name “Redacted Radical” on the platform, appears to be from either Alaska or California.

As of the time of publishing, The Gateway Pundit has been unable to verify her identity independently.

“You can just kill ICE agents,” she begins the video by saying. “You know that? You can just kill them.”

She continues, “You don’t have to hold your phone in their face and ask people when their birthday is, and ask people what their name is, and try to find wherever they end up in Los Angeles. You can kill them.”

“This isn’t about social media clout anymore,” she says. “This isn’t about video. This isn’t about the phone. This is about get a gun and start killing ICE agents.”

She concludes, “They are deputized corrections officers. Kill them.”

Before posting the video, she posted another one complaining that TikTok did not allow people to say whatever they wanted on the platform.

TikTok has since removed the original video, which she reposted. The platform subsequently removed the sound.

Keep reading

German police launch nationwide crackdown on online ‘hate speech’

Germany’s law enforcement authorities have launched a nationwide crackdown on alleged internet ‘hate speech’, the Federal Criminal Police (BKA) have announced. Two thirds of the cases being investigated are linked to “right-wing” ideologies, the BKA said, with the media reporting they often involve “insults against politicians.”

Some “isolated cases” have been tied to “religious… left-wing and foreign” ideologies, according to police. More than 140 criminal investigations have been opened across all German states.

The list of the most common crimes included incitement of hatred, use of prohibited symbols, and approval of crimes and insults, the police said. According to Germany’s ARD broadcaster, the criminal cases often involve “insults against politicians.” 

The police operation included over 65 searches and “numerous” questionings, the BKA stated. Law enforcement has not reported that any suspects were detained as part of the investigations. The BKA also called on the people to “support” the police and contribute to combating online hate by reporting “hate postings” to either law enforcement or their network providers.

Keep reading

Top Trump official calls US airstrikes on Iran ‘pointless,’ suggests ‘deep state’ swayed prez

A top staffer in the federal agency overseeing personnel for the Trump administration has denounced the US strikes on Iran as “pointless” and suggested the decision was made by members of DC’s “deep state.”

Andrew Kloster, who serves as general counsel at the Office of Personnel Management, tweeted — and then deleted — a string of posts ripping the US for having sent “handouts” to Israel in the past and for previously downplaying the threat of Tehran getting a nuclear weapon.

Within a half-hour of President Trump announcing successful US airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities Saturday night, Kloster wrote on X, “I apologize and will never again doubt the power of the deep state.”

In a response to an X user saying that “Iran’s nuclear sites being crushed seems a long-term benefit for the US,” Kloster wrote, “I think it was just kind of pointless.”

He also boosted a post from Vish Burra, disgraced former New York Rep. George Santos’ ex-director of operations, that referred to Israel’s conflict with Iran as a “tribal squabble” after Tehran broke a cease-fire Trump secured Monday night.

The posts — still visible as of Tuesday morning — have since been deleted.

Keep reading

‘I will assassinate her’: Kamala Harris threat suspect said he’d kill the VP ‘if she runs for pres,’ feds say

A 37-year-old man in Pennsylvania has been arrested for allegedly threatening to kill former Vice President and presidential candidate Kamala Harris, repeatedly claiming on social media that he would “assassinate her.”

Steven Alexander Hartford was indicted by a federal grand jury last week and charged with two counts of making threats against a major candidate for the office of the president, court documents show. According to a news release from the Department of Justice, Hartford accessed and controlled the username “thealex13one13” on TikTok, under which he made the threats against the former attorney general of California, beginning in the summer of 2024.

The first threat was allegedly issued on July 21, 2024, in response to a 17-second video posted by the Daily Mail that was captioned, “Will Kamala Harris be the next Democratic nominee?” At about 7:32 p.m. that evening, Hartford allegedly commented, “I will assassinate her if she runs for pres.,” a copy of the indictment states.

Later that same day, the Daily Mail posted a 12-second video to TikTok that showed Harris and was captioned, “Could [Kamala Harris] replace Joe Biden?”

At about 7:56 p.m. that evening, Hartford responded to the video by commenting, “I will assassinate her.”

Love true crime? Sign up for our newsletter, The Law&Crime Docket, to get the latest real-life crime stories delivered right to your inbox.

The following day, authorities say that Hartford made several other threats directed at Harris under the username “thealex13one13,” including: “22 250 coming her way,” “5.56 for her,” and “5.56 waiting for her.”

It appears likely that “22 250” is a reference to a high-velocity 22-caliber rifle cartridge while “5.56” is likely a reference to another rifle cartridge typically used in assault rifles.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office noted that the case stems from “Operation Take Back America,” which it describes as a “nationwide initiative that marshals the full resources of the Department of Justice to repel the invasion of illegal immigration, achieve the total elimination of cartels and transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), and protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime.”

Keep reading

Austria Approves Spyware Law to Infiltrate Encrypted Messaging Platforms

Austria is moving forward with legislation that would authorize law enforcement to infiltrate encrypted communications, marking a pivotal shift in the country’s surveillance powers and stirring a fierce debate over digital privacy.

The federal cabinet’s approval of the plan comes after months of negotiations, with proponents citing national security needs and opponents warning of expansive overreach.

The proposed law targets messaging platforms widely used for private communication, including WhatsApp, Signal, and Telegram.

It introduces the use of spyware, formally known as source TKÜ, which would allow authorities to bypass encryption and monitor conversations directly on suspects’ devices. The change represents a major escalation in surveillance capabilities for a country that has traditionally lagged behind its European counterparts in digital interception laws.

Backers of the measure, such as Social Democrat Jörg Leichtfried, who oversees the Directorate for State Security and Intelligence (DSN), framed the move as a preventative strategy. “The aim is to make people planning terrorist attacks in Austria feel less secure; and increase everyone else’s sense of security.”

Leichtfried called the cabinet’s approval an “important milestone.”

Austria’s domestic intelligence services have until now been dependent on international partners, including the UK and the US, to provide warnings of potential threats.

Keep reading

Obama Wants Filters Not Freedom

Barack Obama’s recent appearance at The Connecticut Forum once again revealed a troubling truth: the political establishment is becoming increasingly comfortable with the idea of government-managed speech.

In an extended conversation with historian Heather Cox Richardson, the former president signaled that his tolerance for open discourse ends where his ideological preferences begin.

Amid warnings about the spread of “propaganda” and falsehoods online, Obama floated the notion of imposing “government regulatory constraints” on digital platforms.

His rationale? To counter business models that, in his opinion, elevate “the most hateful voices or the most polarizing voices or the most dangerous, in the sense of inciting violence.”

But it doesn’t take much reading between the lines to see what’s really being proposed: a top-down mechanism to filter speech based on government-approved standards of truth.

This wasn’t framed as a direct assault on the First Amendment, of course. Obama was careful to qualify that such regulations would remain “consistent with the First Amendment.”

But that’s little comfort when the very premise involves the government determining which voices deserve a platform. Once the state takes a role in deciding what is true or acceptable, the line between moderation and censorship evaporates.

Obama’s remarks included a reference to a saying he alleges is attributed to Russian intelligence and later adopted by Steve Bannon: “You just have to flood the zone with so much poop…that at some point people don’t believe anything.”

This, he argued, is the tactic used by bad actors to disorient the public. What he failed to acknowledge is that the antidote to this isn’t more control, but more speech. Free people, given access to a full spectrum of views, are capable of discerning fact from fiction without government supervision.

The real danger isn’t “too much speech.” It’s the increasing desire to place speech under bureaucratic management.

Obama’s suggestion that some speech is too “hateful” or “dangerous” to be left unchecked invites a future where those in power decide what the public is allowed to hear, a vision completely incompatible with a free society.

And we’ve already seen how that plays out.

Keep reading

Belgian Nationalist Given 12 Month Suspended Sentence Because Someone Else Shared a ‘Racist’ Meme

Belgian conservative-nationalist Dries Van Langenhove has again been sentenced on appeal to one year in prison as a suspended sentence for what the judge said were violations of the Racism and Negationism Act.

The sentence stems from racist memes that were not even posted by him, but by members of a group chat he administrated seven years ago.

The sentence was delivered today by the Court of Appeal in Ghent, although Van Langenhove does not accept the sentence, and the case now goes into cassation.

On X, Van Langenhove simply wrote, “Guilty. 12 months in jail. Madness.”

He later clarified upon receipt of the written verdict that the custodial sentence “appears to be a suspended sentence,” which he suspects is “most likely because the prisons in Belgium are literally full of illegal migrants.”

“Most people don’t realize that the end result of such a sentence is the same. One politically incorrect tweet can now put me in jail. One meme sent by someone else in a group chat I am in can turn the suspended sentence into an effective one. This suspended sentence is the gravest form of censorship they could pursue and an effective way to kill activism,” he added.

Keep reading

Telegram Founder Pavel Durov Blasts EU’s Digital Services Act as Gateway to Censorship and Centralized Control

While European regulators polish their halos and crank out legislation faster than Brussels can subsidize cheese, Pavel Durov is out here playing the role of a digital heretic.

In a French interview, the Telegram founder is sounding alarms over what he sees as a not-so-slow crawl toward speech control disguised as safety. The latest darling of the bureaucratic elite? The Digital Services Act is a piece of legislation that reads like it was written by a committee of risk-averse interns with a fetish for vague language and zero accountability.

Durov isn’t whispering his concerns at think tank luncheons or lobbying dinners. He’s calling it what it is: an institutional greenlight for censorship. “Once you legitimize censorship, it’s difficult to go back,” he says, which probably makes him the least popular dinner guest in Brussels since anyone asked about eurozone debt.

What makes this more than another libertarian tech rant is that Durov isn’t hypothesizing. He’s living it. Right now, he’s effectively stuck in France, being slow-roasted by criminal accusations that, according to him, are so flimsy they wouldn’t hold up in a Bluesky comment section.

“Nothing has ever been proven that shows that I am, even for a second, guilty of anything,” he insists.

One story in particular peels back the clean, professional veneer of Europe’s “rules-based” order.

Durov describes a charming little tête-à-tête with the head of France’s foreign intelligence service, the DGSE.

Over croissants and state-sponsored pressure, he was asked to delete Telegram channels tied to Romanian political activists.

He refused. Not with a polite “I’ll look into it” or some carefully lawyered dodge, but with what may be the most defiant line uttered by a CEO since Steve Jobs told IBM to get lost: “I told them I prefer to die than betray my users.”

Nothing screams “democracy in action” quite like a spy agency demanding censorship in a private meeting. At least they skipped the pretense.

Beneath the PR gloss of the Digital Services Act lies the basic truth of modern governance: power is being centralized and speech, sanitized.

Keep reading