Tag: wrongthink

South Korea’s Ruling Party Pushes “Special Court for Rebellion” – A Communist-Style Assault on Judicial Independence

Korea’s pro-China totalitarian leader met with President Trump this week at the White House.

On August 28, 2025, South Korea’s Democratic Party (DP) crossed a dangerous line. In response to the judiciary’s rejection of an arrest warrant for former Prime Minister Han Duck-soo, the DP not only condemned the courts but also moved to create a so-called “Special Court for Rebellion.”

This is not a normal judicial measure. It is an attempt to strip authority from ordinary courts and build a parallel tribunal designed to guarantee convictions. In reality, this amounts to the creation of a Communist-style pseudo-court—courts in appearance, but not in substance—serving as instruments of political repression.

Key developments on August 28:

** The DP’s emergency committee and hardliners denounced the judiciary’s decision as sending the “wrong signal” to so-called “rebellion forces.”

** Calls for a “Special Court for Rebellion” escalated from rhetoric to formal resolution and legislative planning. According to Yonhap News, the DP will present legislation to establish the tribunal as early as September 4.

** Senior DP lawmakers declared: “The ordinary judiciary cannot be trusted. A special panel is required to handle rebellion charges.”

On social media and in press briefings, DP figures demanded “swift reapplication of warrants” and labeled the judiciary’s independence as an obstacle to “ending rebellion.”

This is nothing less than a Stalinist tactic:

** Branding political opponents as “rebels” to justify extraordinary tribunals;

** Overriding the independent judiciary with a handpicked court loyal to the ruling party;

** Turning the language of law into a weapon for political purge.

The Communist People’s Courts of the 20th century operated in precisely this way: they mimicked judicial form while serving as political tools. The Democratic Party is now attempting to reproduce this in South Korea. It is a direct assault on the separation of powers and the rule of law.

Keep reading

Germany: Economist Thomas Vierhaus Fined €16,100 for Sarcastic X Posts

A Düsseldorf-based economist has found himself at the center of a criminal case for making sarcastic remarks online about high-profile public figures.

Thomas Vierhaus is being prosecuted under Section 185 of the German Criminal Code for three separate X posts that government officials and journalists deemed insulting.

The total fine, delivered in the form of a penalty order from the Düsseldorf District Court on August 12, amounts to €16,100.

This is part of a growing trend in Germany where speech that irritates those in power increasingly results in legal consequences.

The first incident dates back to June 2023. Katrin Göring-Eckardt, Vice President of the Bundestag and a leading figure in the Green Party, had issued an alarmist post about climate change.

She cited droughts, wildfires, and high sea temperatures as proof that the climate crisis was unfolding “with full force.” Vierhaus, unimpressed, replied that “there is indeed an extreme drought, namely in Katrin Göring-Eckardt’s head.”

This offhand remark would likely have disappeared unnoticed if not for a doctoral student who had taken it upon himself to patrol the internet.

The student filled out a criminal complaint form on Göring-Eckardt’s behalf and sent it to her. She signed and forwarded it to the police, setting off the first of several investigations into Vierhaus’s social media activity.

The second charge came after Vierhaus discovered the identity of the same doctoral student and referred to him online as a “little snitch.”

Given that the student had already been submitting complaint forms to politicians for them to sign, the label was hardly unprovoked. Nevertheless, the student filed a personal complaint and claimed insult.

A third post earned Vierhaus further legal trouble when he criticized ARD journalist Moritz Rödle on July 7, 2023.

Rödle had defended Economics Minister Robert Habeck’s decision to skip a Bundestag debate on Germany’s heating law, attending a Bundesrat session instead.

Vierhaus responded with a post calling Rödle a “nincompoop” and added, “You still have a lot to learn in order not to be constantly fooled.”

Rödle filed a complaint through Hessen gegen Hetze, a government-operated online platform that encourages users to report speech deemed hateful or offensive.

Keep reading

DOJ Settles With Ten FBI Whistleblowers Targeted By Biden Administration

Ten FBI whistleblowers who say the Biden administration punished them for their “political beliefs” and for disclosing misconduct in the bureau will have their security clearances reinstated and collect back pay, according to a settlement announced Tuesday.

“These ten (whistleblowers) collectively suffered 12-years-worth of unjustified suspension time,” Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, posted on X after getting word of the settlement. “They were punished (because) of their disclosures/political beliefs. In other words, they were treated like skunks at a picnic. Now they receive justice.”

Sen. Grassley has long advocated for the whistleblowers and has helped navigate the settlements to their retaliation complaints. According to the Senator’s office, under the Biden administration the ten whistleblowers received retaliation that included demotions, loss of pay, and revocation of security clearances.

The legal nonprofit Empower Oversight represented the ten FBI employees. The organization detailed in a 12-page, March 5 letter to the FBI’s general counsel the improper “retaliatory targeting” of the men and women it represented.

The letter also stated:

While it is our belief that new leadership of the FBI has the authority to remedy the wrongs suffered by our clients through management directives and should do so immediately, we are willing to work cooperatively on each of the fronts outlined above in order to explore amicable resolutions in each case.

The New York Post highlighted several whistleblowers and some of their conduct that spawned the reprisals.

One special agent was suspended indefinitely and lost his security clearance after he objected to a SWAT team being used to arrest a January 6 riot defendant on a misdemeanor charge.

Another was suspended without pay and lost his security clearance after being wrongly accused of leaking information to Project Veritas, a conservative undercover journalism operation.

Another agent in New Orleans lost his security clearance when he reported prosecutorial misconduct related to a sweetheart plea deal given to a district attorney charged with sex crimes.

A female FBI staffer was punished for reporting mismanagement and a “gross waste of funds” in connection with how criminal background checks were being processed.

“The actions taken against our clients were in reprisal for protected whistleblowing and/or improper targeting because of their political beliefs,” the March 5 letter by their attorneys stated.

Four of the whistleblowers remained anonymous.

Keep reading

‘World-first’ eSafety commissioner Julie Inman Grant exposed: How taxpayer’s money is being wasted on an endless game of online whack-a-mole – as it’s revealed banned X posts can simply be re-uploaded

The Australian government’s attempts to police online speech have descended into farce after its ‘world’s first’ eSafety Commissioner admitted it was effectively powerless to stop people re-sharing ‘banned’ posts.

On Tuesday, Daily Mail Australia revealed the Australian government tried to force a Canadian man called Chris Elston to delete an ‘offensive’ post about a UN trans expert, threatening X owner Elon Musk with an $800,000 fine if it was not removed from the platform.

Mr Elston, who goes by the name of ‘Billboard Chris’ on X and lives in Canada, refused to delete the post.

When X subsequently complied with the ‘removal order’ by geo-blocking the post in Australia, Mr Elston simply re-shared the offending post. 

In a colossal back-fire for the e-Safety Commissioner, that post alone has been seen over 130,000 times and a concerted campaign to re-share it by others has racked up hundreds of thousands of views.

In response to this publication’s story, Billionaire X owner Musk said: ‘What is the world coming to?’ 

Now, the taxpayer-funded eSafety Commissioner has admitted it can only block or remove the subsequent posts if other complaints are made by the offended party.

‘eSafety’s Adult Cyber Abuse Scheme is a complaints-based scheme,’ a spokesperson for the eSafety Commissioner told Daily Mail Australia. 

‘In cases where a new version of the material has been posted after a removal notice has been issued and complied with, we require a new complaint from the targeted Australian resident – or someone authorised to report on their behalf – to take regulatory action.’

This effectively means the ‘world’s first’ online safety regulator could be engaged in an endless game of whack-a-mole as it attempts to police speech online. 

Political figures were lining up to condemn the alleged waste of Aussie taxpayer’s money. 

Keep reading

Publishing Network Booted from MSN After Submitting IJR and The Blaze, Prompting Accusations of Anti-Conservative Bias

Michael Chace hadn’t seen it coming.

Before July 16, business was good for his publishing network company, Chace Media. In particular, its partnership with the news syndicator Microsoft Network had grown increasingly successful.

“We were doing over 600 million page views a month on MSN, which is substantial,” Chace told The Western Journal in a phone interview.

Then one day, MSN dropped the hammer, terminating its agreement with Chace Media without a legitimate explanation, Chace said.

The sudden termination ultimately brought him to one conclusion: This was about the conservative news content he had tried submitting.

Chace had worked with Microsoft as a licensor — MSN would license different genres of written content from him and then publish it on its platform.

His strategy was simple. Working as an intermediary, Chace advised media brands on how to adjust their content to fit MSN’s policies. Once adjusted, Chace would submit the brands to MSN, where a team of reviewers either accepted them, rejected them, or returned them for corrections, which were usually minor.

“I don’t care what anyone’s view is, as long as it is brand-safe. It’s not my role to decide left versus right, or dogs versus cats,” Chace told The Western Journal.

It’s a formula that Chace had repeated many times since March 2024, when he started working with MSN.

“Over the last year, my publisher network grew significantly. We had, I think, 54 brands that were approved on MSN through my direct relationship,” Chace says.

During that same period, he said, MSN had also rejected more than 20 brands that Chace had sent over, which was just part of the process.

Keep reading

Millions of immigrants could now be scrutinized for ‘anti-Americanism’ and ‘antisemitism’

The Trump administration is making a drastic change to how it decides which immigrants can receive certain benefits.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, which falls under the Department of Homeland Security, is changing its policies so its employees are required to consider “circumstances where an alien has endorsed, promoted, supported, or otherwise espoused the views of an anti-American or terrorist organization or group,” according to the document.

The document said those circumstances could include “antisemitic terrorism, antisemitic terrorist organizations, and antisemitic ideologies,” with no further specifics.

The change could impact millions of immigrants who are not citizens and deal with the agency, for issues including changing their immigration status or applying for a change of status. Consequences for expressing anti-Americanism or antisemitism could include a denial of whatever benefit the individual applied for, like a change of status, or a visa renewal.

“They’re saying that they can broadly use their discretion to deny people who have been involved in any kind of anti-American activity,” said Matt Cameron, a local immigration attorney.

“There’s no definition of antisemitism in the law,” he added. “We’ve seen with Mahmoud Khalil, Rümeysa Öztürk, that the definition of ‘antisemitic’ has been expanded to really anyone who opposes what Israel is doing in Gaza.”

Attorney Mahsa Khanbabai represents Rümeysa Öztürk, a Turkish Tufts doctoral student who was detained by ICE agents for co-authoring an op-ed urging her university to stop funding Israeli companies supporting the war in Gaza. She has since been released as she continues deportation proceedings.

“We’re waiting to see what further guidance the administration is going to be providing to its immigration officers as they try to decide what is anti-American or antisemitic in terms of adjudicating a person’s benefits application,” said Khanbabai, who is based in Massachusetts.

The limitations the Trump administration is imposing on immigrants’ First Amendment rights is playing out in court, but attorneys say this policy change is a new way to limit immigrants’ freedom of expression.

Keep reading

Man ARRESTED In UK For Saying “We Love Bacon”

A British man has been arrested for saying “we love bacon” while protesting the building of a proposed giant mosque.

The Telegraph reports that the protest occurred at the site of planned super mosque in the Lake District, which is populated by an almost 100% white population.

The report further notes that the 23-year-old man, was not otherwise being disruptive, causing any damage or being in any way violent.

The arresting police officer claims that the grounds for the detainment were “racial abuse.”

Telegraph writer  Isabel Oakeshott notes:

Of course Muslims don’t eat pork. As a result, they cannot share this particular delight with the rest of us. However, despite a steady rise in our own Muslim population, the UK remains a Christian country. Supposedly, we also enjoy free speech. Why then did the unfortunate father find himself frogmarched away from the protest by two police officers?

Saying ‘We love bacon’ is simply a truism. We British do love it, and there is nothing wrong with saying so.

As for remarks about bacon near a religious site or in the company of Muslims, they hardly constitute public disorder, still less ‘racial abuse,’ as the officer who arrested him can be heard suggesting.

The South Lakes Islamic Centre, often referred to as the Kendal mosque due to its proximity to the town of Kendal in Cumbria, is a £2.5 million facility under construction in Dalton-in-Furness on the edge of the Lake District.

Keep reading

AfD Candidate Excluded from German Mayoral Election with Court Upholding Decision

In Germany, the Alternative for Germany (AfD) faced a setback when one of its candidates was excluded from a local mayoral race.

Joachim Paul, an AfD state parliament member, was barred from running for mayor in Ludwigshafen am Rhein, a city of about 170,000 residents, due to concerns raised by opponents about his adherence to Germany’s constitutional principles.

An administrative court recently upheld this decision, limiting Paul’s options to a post-election challenge.

On August 5, 2025, Ludwigshafen’s election committee voted 6-1 to exclude Paul, citing doubts over his loyalty to the free democratic order outlined in Germany’s Basic Law.

The committee, composed of representatives from globalist center-left and center-right parties like the Social Democrats (SPD), Christian Democrats (CDU), and Free Democrats (FDP), but excluding the AfD, based its ruling on an 11-page report from the state’s interior ministry.

This report, requested by current mayor Jutta Steinruck, detailed Paul’s alleged connections to right-wing figures and statements deemed problematic.

The Neustadt an der Weinstraße administrative court dismissed Paul’s urgent appeal on August 18, 2025, ruling it inadmissible and stating that electoral stability takes precedence, with reviews only possible after the September 21 vote.

The judges found no clear error in the committee’s decision and noted that a full probe into the claims would be too time-consuming before the election.

They referenced Paul’s inclusion in the 2024 Rhineland-Palatinate constitutional protection report and a prior court confirmation of the AfD as a suspected extremist group.

Allegations included Paul’s 2022 article praising J.R.R. Tolkien’s “The Lord of the Rings” for conservative themes like defending homeland and culture, which authorities viewed as promoting ethnic nationalism.

Other points involved his use of “remigration” for non-integrated migrants, a meeting with Austrian activist Martin Sellner, and descriptions of violence as linked to “young, male, oriental” individuals.

Paul’s office in Koblenz was described as a hub for right-wing events, including those with “New Right” affiliations.

Paul, a 55-year-old former teacher and AfD member since 2013, rejected the accusations, claiming they stem from political bias and that non-left views are unfairly labeled extremist.

He suggested the exclusion was premeditated to sideline the AfD, which polled strongly in Ludwigshafen during recent federal elections. In interviews, Paul vowed to continue fighting legally and encouraged supporters to rally.

Keep reading

Court Rules New York County Denied Free Speech Rights to Pro-Life Advocates

A federal court has ruled that Westchester County, New York, violated the First Amendment rights of pro-life sidewalk counselors, marking a significant victory for free speech in a legal challenge brought by Thomas More Society attorneys. The decision in Hulinsky v. County of Westchester found the County liable for enacting an unconstitutional provision in its 2022 “Reproductive Health Care Facilities Access Act,” or Chapter 425, which restricted peaceful pro-life advocacy near abortion facilities.

The decision awards plaintiffs Oksana Hulinsky and Regina Molinelli nominal damages for the chilling of their life-saving sidewalk counseling for over two-and-half years as a result of the unconstitutional law, even though the County attempted to avoid liability by repealing the offending provision earlier this year.

This ruling builds on a March 14 decision that rejected the County’s attempt to dismiss Plaintiffs’ claims against part of Chapter 425 prohibiting so-called “interference” with abortion access “by deceptive means or otherwise”—a sweeping and unprecedented restriction adopted as part of the County’s furor over the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs.The Court rightly held the provision “criminalized large swaths of protected speech” on pain of jail, fines, and civil liability, flagrantly violating the First Amendment.

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