Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

“Davos Can Really Replace the UN”

Inside the book that maps the architecture behind global governance — from the Epstein files to the Pact for the Future

Lies are Unbekoming | April 1, 2026

On June 13, 2019, the United Nations and the World Economic Forum signed a partnership deal to “accelerate the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.” That same evening, WEF president Börge Brende — Norway’s former Foreign Minister — had dinner with Jeffrey Epstein at Epstein’s Manhattan townhouse. The Epstein files, released January 2026, contain an exchange between the two from the previous year. Epstein to Brende: “Davos can really replace the UN. C21, cyber, crypto . genetics… intl coordination.” Brende back to Epstein: “Exactly — we need a new global architecture. World Economic Forum (Davos) is uniquely positioned — public private.”

The next day, the UN General Assembly adopted the framework for restructuring global governance.

That sequence — the partnership signing, the Epstein dinner, the candid admission about replacing the UN with a public-private architecture, and then the formal adoption — opens Jacob Nordangård’s The Digital World Brain. Pages two and three. Footnoted to the UN resolution number, the Epstein files, and the General Assembly record.

I keep coming back to it because it captures what this book does that almost nothing else in the independent research space manages. I’ve followed Jacob’s work for years now and interviewed him about his research. Each book peels back another layer of the same institutional architecture, and each time I think he’s reached the limit of what can be documented, the next one goes further. Nordangård doesn’t speculate. He doesn’t editorialize much. He lays institutional actions next to each other in chronological order and lets the pattern announce itself.

The Researcher

Nordangård has a PhD in Technology and Social Change from Linköping University. Master’s degrees in geography and in culture and media production. He’s taught at three Swedish universities. His doctoral work traced how institutional networks shape EU biofuels policy — mapping the actors, the funding flows, and the coordination mechanisms that produce outcomes which look spontaneous but aren’t.

He’s been applying that same method to global governance for over a decade now, across five books. Rockefeller: Controlling the Game followed the money behind the climate agenda from the 1950s forward — Rockefeller Foundation grants to climate scientists, Rockefeller Brothers Fund involvement in virtually every major environmental conference and agreement. The Global Coup d’Etat documented the pre-existing plans that the pandemic accelerated. The Digital World Brain, first published in Swedish in 2022 and now out in an expanded English edition, takes the UN Secretary-General’s 2021 report Our Common Agenda and its twelve commitments apart, chapter by chapter, tracing the institutional genealogy behind each one.

The man also fronts a doom metal band called Wardenclyffe whose lyrics are drawn from his research. Make of that what you will.

What the Documents Actually Say

Our Common Agenda proposes twelve commitments. Read casually, they sound like boilerplate — leave no one behind, protect the planet, build trust, upgrade digital cooperation. The kind of language that slides past without friction.

Nordangård slows down and traces where each commitment came from, who drafted it, who funded the drafting, and what it requires in practice. A “new social contract” that ties your individual obligations to planetary boundaries defined by a scientific council you didn’t elect. Digital identity for every person on earth, connected to monitoring infrastructure. A Futures Lab to collect and analyse data on citizens’ attitudes, opinions, and life choices using AI. A Climate Governance Council. A Special Envoy to speak on behalf of future generations — meaning, in practice, an unelected office with a mandate to override present democratic decisions in the name of people who don’t yet exist.

Traced back through the commissions and think tanks that produced them, these twelve commitments form a three-layer governance structure. At the top, an upgraded United Nations with enforcement powers and a standing army. Beneath that, anticipatory governance — mass data collection feeding AI systems that predict behaviour and detect non-compliance. And at the base, multi-stakeholder governance: public-private partnerships implementing decisions at every level of society.

The preparatory work goes back to at least 2015, when the Albright-Gambari Commission — supported by the Stimson Center, a Washington think tank sitting at the intersection of the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, and the major philanthropic foundations — recommended a World Conference on Global Institutions to coincide with the UN’s 75th anniversary in 2020.

Two months before that anniversary conference could take shape, COVID-19 shut down the world. The questions that had been prepared for member state discussions — “What are today’s most fundamental global challenges? How is the UN standing up to new challenges?” — suddenly had a very specific answer.

The New Material

This English edition adds two chapters covering events through early 2026, and they’re the reason even readers of the Swedish original need this book.

The Pact for the Future was signed at the UN Summit of the Future in September 2024. Nordangård documents the signing and the opposition — such as it was. Russia objected. But Russia’s complaint wasn’t about individual freedom or democratic accountability. It was about ensuring Russian participation as an equal partner in the new architecture. The BRICS nations voted against Russia’s procedural amendment. They didn’t want to stop the digital governance infrastructure. They just didn’t want to be junior partners in it.

The chapter called “The Great Disruptor” will unsettle people across the political spectrum, which is probably the point. Nordangård maps the network connections between the Trump administration and the very institutions Trump’s supporters believe he opposes. J.D. Vance came up through Peter Thiel’s venture capital world. Thiel sits on the Bilderberg Group’s steering committee — alongside WEF’s Börge Brende. His company Palantir was seed-funded by the CIA’s In-Q-Tel and is a partner of the WEF’s Centre for the Fourth Industrial Revolution. ICE is now using Palantir’s AI surveillance to generate “confidence scores” for tracking immigrants. Elon Musk’s grandfather ran the Canadian branch of Technocracy Inc. Musk himself was named a WEF Young Global Leader in 2008. The book includes an appendix table of Young Global Leaders with ties to the Trump administration. It runs long.

Nordangård isn’t arguing that Trump is a puppet. He’s documenting that the institutional connections run in every direction, and that what looks like opposition may be accelerating the dissolution of the old order in ways that serve the same technocratic endpoint. The evidence is specific enough that readers can evaluate it themselves.

But the most unsettling material in the new edition is a May 2025 white paper from the WEF’s Global Government Technology Centre called The Agentic State. Nordangård catches something in the title that the authors may not have intended to advertise. In psychology, the “agentic state” is Stanley Milgram’s term for the mental condition in which a person stops seeing themselves as responsible for their own actions and becomes an instrument of authority. It’s the mechanism that made ordinary people administer what they believed were lethal electric shocks in Milgram’s obedience experiments.

The white paper’s meaning is the other one — a state governed by AI agents. But the resonance hangs in the air.

The paper proposes that laws can evolve from static rules into “a far more dynamic living system, continuously interpreted, tested, and refined by agents.” Human legislators would set “broad societal goals.” Everything else — specific rules, thresholds, requirements — gets “adjusted dynamically by agents with limited or no human intervention.” Compliance becomes continuous, monitored in real time by AI systems issuing yes/no attestations across health, safety, financial, environmental, and ethics domains. Citizen input comes through “emotion detection in digital interactions” feeding into the system’s self-adjustment loops.

The authors ask what safeguards would be needed if AI agents could “issue fines or trigger legal action in real time.” They don’t answer their own question. They move on.

This isn’t a leaked memo. It’s a public white paper from a WEF-affiliated centre whose founding strategic partners include IBM, Microsoft, SAP, Oracle, and Huawei. Its lead author is the Chief Information Officer of the Estonian government. Nordangård’s contribution is placing it in the context of everything else in the book. After 250 pages of institutional genealogy, the paper reads less like futurism and more like a product specification.

The book runs 283 pages with more than 250 footnotes, a multi-page bibliography, and appendix tables cross-referencing WEF Young Global Leaders to government positions, milestones in the digital ID agenda, and the full timeline of climate governance from a 1971 MIT study through the 2024 Pact for the Future. It’s dense, and it demands an engaged reader. This is a reference work — the kind of book you come back to six months later when something shows up in the news and you want to understand which institutional thread it connects to.

Where It Comes From

The concept of a “World Brain” was articulated by H.G. Wells in 1938. Oliver Reiser, a philosophy professor at the University of Pittsburgh, developed it further through the 1940s and 1970s into a vision he called the “World Sensorium” — all of humanity integrated into a collective technological organism, governed by a World Organisation, guided by what he termed “radio-eugenics.” His book Cosmic Humanism and World Unity was published posthumously by the World Institute, which operated from offices at the United Nations Plaza in New York.

This wasn’t fringe material that got ignored. It ran directly through the Club of Rome, the Club of Budapest, the World Future Society, and into the bodies that drafted Our Common Agenda. Nordangård traces the institutional lineage. That lineage is the book’s spine.

In 1968, Columbia University professor Zbigniew Brzezinski — later US National Security Advisor, co-founder of the Trilateral Commission with David Rockefeller — wrote that new technologies could make possible “extensive population control, including the monitoring of each citizen and maintaining up-to-date files on their health or personal behaviour.” Power, he wrote, would “gravitate into those who control information and can correlate it most rapidly,” encouraging “tendencies during the next several decades toward a technocratic dictatorship, leaving less and less room for political procedures as we now know them.” That was 1968. The technology now exists to do everything Brzezinski described. The institutional architecture to deploy it is what this book documents.

The Proportionality Problem

One detail from the conclusion stays with me. Human-generated CO2 represents roughly 4% of total atmospheric carbon dioxide, which itself makes up 0.04% of the atmosphere. That comes out to about 16 parts per million. To influence a fraction of those 16 parts per million, the plan requires digitising, monitoring, tokenising, and subjecting to real-time compliance enforcement essentially everything — food production, energy, transportation, land use, individual consumption. All overseen by unelected “Planetary Stewards.”

Nordangård asks the obvious questions. How much energy will the Digital World Brain itself consume? Can the stated carbon targets be reached without measures indistinguishable from permanent authoritarian control? The white papers don’t address this.

Read the Documents

The Pact for the Future has been signed. The Global Digital Compact is annexed to it. The WHO Pandemic Agreement was adopted in May 2025. The Agentic State white paper is online for anyone to read. The UN-WEF partnership agreement is a matter of public record. The foundation funding behind the organisations that drafted all of this is disclosed in their own annual reports.

What Nordangård has done across 283 pages and more than 250 footnotes is demonstrate that these are not independent initiatives happening to converge. They are components of an architecture that has been under construction for decades, advanced by identifiable people through documented channels. He’s brought the receipts.

The book ends on a note of conviction — that this system, however carefully engineered, cannot ultimately prevail against what he calls humanity’s “natural intelligence.” Whether or not you share that faith, the institutional map he’s drawn demands a serious response. The documents are real. The signatures are dated. The timelines check out.

Read the book. Then read the documents it cites. Nordangård includes the URLs in his footnotes. You can verify every claim that matters without leaving your desk.

Then decide for yourself what a system designed to monitor every person, predict every behaviour, and enforce compliance in real time through AI agents actually is — regardless of what its architects choose to call it.

Jacob is an independent researcher doing work that no university department and no mainstream publisher would touch. He funds this through book sales and reader support. If what you’ve read here matters to you, buy the book. Give it to someone who’s starting to ask questions. This is the kind of research that deserves to find a wider audience, and that only happens when readers carry it forward.


The Digital World Brain: Our Common Agenda and The Pact for the Future by Jacob Nordangård, PhD. First English edition, 2026. Pharos Media Productions.

Get the book: pharosmedia.se

Follow Jacob’s research: drjacobnordangard.substack.com

April 6, 2026 Posted by | Book Review, Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | | Comments Off on “Davos Can Really Replace the UN”

Bahrain faces scrutiny for opposition crackdown after detainee killed

Al Mayadeen | April 3, 2026

A Bahraini man detained during last month’s missile strikes on the kingdom has died in custody under contested circumstances, sparking renewed scrutiny of the country’s security practices amid wartime tensions.

Mohammad al-Mousawi, a Bahraini national who was detained as Bahrain came under attack from Iran, disappeared for several days before his family was contacted and asked to retrieve his body from a military hospital, relatives said. They reported that his body bore multiple injuries, including slash marks, bruising, and wounds on the soles of his feet.

His death has quickly become a flashpoint in the country, with critics accusing authorities of reverting to tactics used to suppress protests during the 2011 uprising.

Bahrain, which hosts the US Navy’s Fifth Fleet, has detained dozens of individuals since the outbreak of the war, including people accused of:

  • filming strikes and demonstrations,
  • expressing support for Iran against US-Israeli aggression
  • alleged espionage.

“They want to make sure nobody challenges the state’s narrative and silence any voices not telling the story of the war how they want it to be told,” said Sayed Ahmed al-Wadaei of the Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy, a London-based advocacy group.

Bahraini Interior Ministry dismisses clear evidence

The Interior Ministry claimed al-Mousawi had been arrested on suspicion of spying for Iran, an allegation his family denies. Authorities also dismissed circulating images of his injuries as “inaccurate and misleading,” while insisting that the country is acting to protect national security.

In a statement, the government rejected accusations of sectarian discrimination, saying all actions were carried out in accordance with the law and that independent bodies are responsible for investigating claims of abuse.

Al-Mousawi had previously spent around 11 years in prison as part of a 21-year sentence on charges widely regarded as false, including accusations of arson and alleged membership in a “terrorist cell”. His family and rights groups have clarified that these charges are false and fabricated.

Severe abuse evident on al-Mousawi, Bahrain denies the obvious

A relative and a close family friend said Mohammad al-Mousawi disappeared on March 19 after attending prayers with two companions who also remain missing. Both spoke to the Associated Press on condition of anonymity, citing fears of reprisals. Rights groups have long accused Bahraini authorities of carrying out enforced disappearances.

On March 27, the family said they were called to collect his body. A relative who viewed it at the morgue reported signs of severe abuse, including injuries consistent with whipping using cables, as well as apparent electrocution and cigarette burns.

The Associated Press reviewed images of the body that showed marks consistent with accounts from five witnesses who said they saw it in person, all speaking anonymously. Bahrain’s Interior Ministry said al-Mousawi had been held by the National Security Agency, whose arrest powers were restored in 2017 after being revoked following the 2011 unrest.

The Ministry dismissed the images as “inaccurate and misleading,” while a military hospital attributed the death to a heart attack. His family said he had no known preexisting conditions. Ahmed Banasr of Physicians for Human Rights said the injuries were consistent with blunt force trauma, noting that wounds on the soles of the feet suggested abuse rather than a fall or fight.

Bahrain’s long record of repression, violence seeps into al-Mousawi’s case

Human rights organizations say the detention and death of Mohammad al-Mousawi mark a new phase in Bahrain’s long-running crackdown on opposition, which peaked during the 2011 protests. That year, the ruling Al Khalifa family suppressed mass demonstrations with support from Saudi and Emirati forces.

“It remains to be seen how far the government will go in its crackdown on people,” said exiled Bahraini activist Maryam al-Khawaja, whose father is imprisoned in Bahrain. “What we are witnessing now is certainly far more severe than in recent years,” she added.

Since the start of the war on Iran, at least 41 people, including migrant workers, have been arrested on accusations of publishing images of Iranian strikes. Some face charges of “treason”, which can carry penalties ranging from life imprisonment to the death penalty. In one case, 21-year-old Hussein Futeil and a friend were detained after posting videos of themselves waving a portrait of Iranian leader Sayyed Ali Khamenei during a protest outside the US Embassy.

According to his father, Naji Futeil, the two briefly reappeared after hours of questioning before Hussein later informed his family he faced five charges, including misuse of social media, incitement of hatred, and treason. Rights advocates say the cases reflect a broader effort to silence opposition, with Sayyed Ahmed al-Wadaei stating authorities aim to ensure no one challenges the state’s narrative.

April 3, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , | Comments Off on Bahrain faces scrutiny for opposition crackdown after detainee killed

UK’s New Pandemic Plan Would Turn Big Tech Into a Mass Location Tracking Network

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | March 30, 2026

Britain’s new £1 billion ($1.3m) pandemic strategy treats a future outbreak as a “certainty” and proposes building a contact tracing system that would feed on real-time location data harvested with the help of Silicon Valley’s biggest companies.

The plan, published by the Department of Health and Social Care, also calls for PPE stockpiles, new emergency legislation, and a biosecurity research hub in Essex.

But the centerpiece that deserves the most scrutiny is the contact tracing proposal, which would create a surveillance architecture designed to track the movements of millions of people, ready to switch on at a moment’s notice.

The UKHSA will run the new system, which the strategy document says will use “live location data” and artificial intelligence to provide “a more rapid, large-scale detection and alert system during pandemics.”

The agency plans to “explore options to work with ‘big tech’” to build it, with deployment targeted for 2030. The government is pre-building a location surveillance system in partnership with companies whose entire business model depends on harvesting as much personal data as possible.

The strategy doesn’t name which companies, what data-sharing agreements would look like, or what happens to your location history once the pandemic ends.

The UK government has already tracked its own citizens through their phones without telling them. A 2021 report by the Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Behaviors (SPI-B) revealed that government-funded researchers tracked one in ten people in Britain via their mobile phones in February of that year, without the users’ knowledge or permission.

Researchers used cell phone mobility data to select over 4,200 vaccinated individuals, then monitored them through 40 call data records with corresponding location observations. The data was used for behavioral analysis, tracking radius of movement on vaccination day, whether people visited businesses during opening hours, and whether they went straight home afterwards. None of this was made public at the time.

When the tracking came to light, a spokesperson for Big Brother Watch said citizens would be “disturbed to discover they were unwittingly tracked and subjected to behavioral analysis via their phones.”

“No one expects that by going to get a vaccine they will be tracked and monitored by their own Government,” the spokesperson said. “This is deeply chilling and could be extremely damaging to public trust in medical confidentiality. Between looming Covid passports and vaccine phone surveillance, this Government is turning Britain into a Big Brother state under the cover of Covid. This should be a wake up call to us all.”

The government’s defense was that the data was collected at cell tower level, not the individual level, and that it was “GDPR-compliant” data provided by a company that “collected, cleaned, and anonymized” it.

A government spokesperson said “the mobile phone location data used is GDPR-compliant and has been provided from a company that collected, cleaned, and anonymized the data” and that “the data is at cell tower rather than individual level and the researchers were granted access to the dataset under a research contract with ethical approval provided to the researchers from the University of Oxford, working on behalf of SPI-B.”

That defense tells you everything about how the government thinks about location surveillance. It tracked millions of people and called it ethical because a private company “anonymized” the data first. It monitored the movements of vaccinated individuals and called it acceptable because the tracking happened at cell tower resolution rather than GPS precision. The distinction between “cell tower level” and “individual surveillance” is thinner than the government wants you to believe.

Cell tower data can still reveal where you live, where you work, and what you do on a given day, especially when cross-referenced with other datasets. The fact that a private company sat between the government and the raw data doesn’t change what happened: people went to get vaccinated, and their government secretly tracked where they went afterwards.

That history makes the new strategy’s contact tracing plans look less like pandemic preparedness and more like the next step in normalizing population-level location surveillance.

The 2021 tracking was done covertly, without legislation, using data purchased from a private company. The new strategy proposes formalizing this kind of capability, building it into permanent government systems, and enlisting “big tech” to run it at scale. What was done secretly during Covid is now being written into official policy.

During the pandemic, the UK’s first attempt at a centralized contact tracing app collapsed under its own privacy problems. The government’s original NHSX app tried to store user data on a central server, a design so invasive that Apple and Google refused to let it run properly on their operating systems.

March 31, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Comments Off on UK’s New Pandemic Plan Would Turn Big Tech Into a Mass Location Tracking Network

FTC Warns Visa, Mastercard, PayPal, Stripe Over Political Debanking

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | March 29, 2026

Four companies that collectively control how most Americans buy and sell things received warning letters this week from FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson, threatening enforcement action if they deny customers access to financial services based on political or religious beliefs. The targets are Visa, Mastercard, PayPal, and Stripe.

The letters didn’t name a single specific violation, and they didn’t need to. The track record is already public. PayPal has frozen accounts of several political commentators.

Stripe cut off payment processing for President Trump’s campaign website after January 6, 2021. Both companies have spent years making unilateral decisions about who deserves access to the financial system, hiding behind vague terms of service that give compliance teams almost unlimited discretion.

“Full participation in commerce and public life necessarily requires that law-abiding individuals can access, and freely participate in, our financial system,” Chairman Ferguson wrote.

“It is inconsistent with American values to deny law-abiding individuals the ability to run their legitimate businesses and feed their families because they attracted the ire of rogue American officials, overzealous activists, or, more worryingly, foreign governments seeking to control public discourse,” he continued.

“That is why President Trump’s August 7, 2025, Executive Order on debanking makes clear that it is unacceptable to debank law-abiding citizens due to ‘political affiliations, religious beliefs, or lawful business activities.’”

Ferguson’s letters lean on Section 5 of the FTC Act, which prohibits “unfair or deceptive acts or practices.”

The logic is that if your terms promise equal access and you cut someone off for their politics, that’s deceptive. “As an American citizen, I abhor and condemn any efforts to debank or otherwise deny law-abiding consumers access,” Ferguson wrote, citing Trump’s August 2025 executive order on debanking.

He told Visa and Mastercard they’re responsible not just for their own conduct but for member banks on their networks. “Equally concerning is the conduct of payments providers and payment networks that turn a blind eye when their financial institution members debank consumers for these reasons,” he wrote.

PayPal declined to comment. Visa and Mastercard didn’t respond. Only Stripe pushed back: “At Stripe, we do not restrict access to our services based on political viewpoints or affiliation.”

Ferguson’s letters describe payment services as “essential for Americans’ participation in everyday commerce, and, directly or indirectly, for the exercise of core rights and freedoms.” It treats access to payment infrastructure not as a privilege companies can revoke at will, but as something closer to a necessity.

The real question is whether letters become action. The FTC opened no investigations and announced no penalties.

March 30, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Comments Off on FTC Warns Visa, Mastercard, PayPal, Stripe Over Political Debanking

Battle for Hungary: EU attacks on Orban are a sign of worse things to come

By Tarik Cyril Amar | RT | March 28, 2026

About a century ago – between those two World Wars which Europeans have generously given to the history of humanity – there was a joke about Hungary: It was a monarchy without a king and a landlocked country ruled by an admiral. It was funny because it was true.

Nowadays, though, we have proudly advanced. Now, we have a whole European Union, with 27 member states and 450 million people, run by an unelected German who really serves the US and has, a bit like Siegfried or Brunhilde, a special “shield” (about which more below) to protect a “democracy” administered and defined by an non-transparent, privileged, and aloof nomenklatura of equally unelected bureaucrats.

Contemporary Hungary, meanwhile, is, by the sober standards of reality, by no means a perfect but a perfectly normal country, that is, neither better nor worse than most of the rest. No longer a weird monarchy with a gaping hole at the top but a run-of-the-mill Western-style capitalist democracy, it has a feisty prime minister for a leader instead of an admiral without a coast. That prime minister, Viktor Orban, is a typical if especially canny and successful professional politician, who combines a knack for crowd appeal, demagoguery included, with deft political power plays.

It is true, if electoral districts need re-designing in Hungary, the party in power is likely to favor its own chances, just like they do in the EU’s big “daddy” the US, for instance. Likewise, if you are doing business in Hungary, being close to the party – or parties –in power tends to be better for your company. But that’s no different in, again, the US (with the caveat that there the current president and his extensive clan are now taking an extra large cut for themselves). Or, indeed, in Germany and France. The latter, as it happens, has just reached a new low in Transparency International’s annual corruption index.

Hungary may not have unbiased mass media, as its critics indignantly charge. But then, who does? Certainly not Germany, Britain, France, or, for that matter, the US. As a matter of fact, it is the EU and the German authorities which are currently obstinately misusing a sanctions regime designed for foreign policy purposes – and not working, but that’s another matter – to circumvent ordinary legal procedures, trample on civil and human rights, and punitively destroy the existence of individual dissidents and critical journalist.

Hungary’s elections may suffer from that media slant and some sharp administrative practice, too. But that again, is at least equally true of all major states in Europe and of the US as well. Indeed, say what you will about voting under real-existing Orbanism, it has not featured the brutal, EU-driven manipulation we have recently seen in Romania and Moldova.

And there is also nothing comparable in Orban’s Hungary to the extremely suspicious (to say the least) manner in which the last German elections featured a statistically bizarre accumulation of “mistakes” that eliminated the New-Left BSW from parliament.

Since it seems likely that a correct – or clean – result would make Germany’s current ruling coalition impossible, the implications of this case of deeply flawed elections at the very center of the EU are most disturbing: at this point, Germany may have an electorally baseless government, the German parliament’s refusal to permit a clearly necessary recount is either more foul play or indistinguishable from it, and Berlin’s political course – domestically and abroad – would be principally different under a government that would have to rely on the correct election results.

And let’s not even mention minor details, such as that Hungary’s mixed election system (combining first-past-the-post districts and national party lists) is far more representative than that of that “cradle of parliamentary democracy” and police-state-for-Zionism Great Britain.

In view of the above, you would expect, if anything, Budapest going after Brussels as well as some other individual EU member states to demand better democratic behavior. But this is the alternative-reality world of the EU’s sectarian “elite,” where genocidal Israel is only defending itself, “Europe is the values of the Talmud” (perish the thought its history may have a little more to do with first Christian and then Enlightenment ideas), the US is a good and reliable ally, and four white, blonde women serving the same radical Centrism proudly constitute “diversity.”

Hence, in topsy-turvy land, it is, obviously, once again the EU that is charging Hungary with flunking the test of “democracy.” That, in and of itself, might not be important: words are cheap. The problem is that, as before in Romania and even Moldova – not even a member state – the EU Commission has long passed from mere talk, at which it excels, to mean action, which makes everything only worse. Indeed, the EU’s meddling in Hungary has recently escalated.

The catalyst for this escalation is the upcoming Hungarian election. To be held on April 12, domestically, back in Hungary, the outcome will merely decide if Orban can stay in power – which he has been without interruption since 2010 – or will be replaced by the opposition’s new hope, Peter Magyar, a former Orbanist himself. Yet there are good reasons Politico has called these “the EU’s most important elections” this year despite the fact that Hungary is a small country of less than 10 million citizens.

For one thing, Orban is the primus inter pares of a group of very inconvenient sovereigntist rebels inside the EU, which also includes Slovakia’s leader Robert Fico, the Czech Republic’s Andrej Babis and, occasionally but with special weight, Bart de Wever from Belgium, which is an EU founding member. Orban’s toppling would not only weaken this loose group of leaders that still remember that they are supposed to serve their countries first but also make for a chilling object lesson in what happens to those frustrating Brussels too much.

Especially, if they resist the Commission party line on three topics: the relationship with Russia, the Western – now entirely EU-financed – proxy war waged against Moscow by means of Ukraine, and, last but not least, money, in particular money to be wasted – or not – on Kiev’s Zelensky regime. In all three areas, Orban has been Brussel’s main irritant, consistently arguing for normalization with Russia through diplomacy, a quick negotiated end to the proxy war, and an end also to the pathological inter-dependence with Zelensky’s ultra-corrupt and extremely dangerous regime.

Recently, this Hungarian resistance has led to repeated clashes with both the EU establishment and Kiev. Zelensky has publicly threatened Orban with violence in the worst Mafia style; Budapest has taken action against extremely suspicious transports of tens of millions of euro and dollars as well as bullion to Kiev; Hungary and Ukraine have been sparring over Kiev’s attempts to block the Druzhba pipeline; Budapest has been blocking yet another massive “loan” (never to be paid back) for Zelensky and his crew, and, most recently, Orban has called on Kiev to immediately withdraw its agents and operatives from Hungary.

And, by the way, you may suspect Orban of seeking an electoral boost. But even if that is the case, it makes no difference to the fact that aggressive subversion is exactly what the Zelensky regime does. Ask the Germans how things with their pipelines went. The braver ones might dare answer.

As we live in modern, online times, the shape much of the escalating EU meddling on the side of Orban’s opponents in Budapest and Kiev has taken is a nasty combination of social media manipulation at scale, illicit surveillance and spying, and the targeted dissemination of what is meant to be compromising information.

A smelly affair features a Hungarian journalist who has produced a source-free report alleging massive Russian interference in the elections, while spending his free time facilitating an EU country’s intelligence service eavesdropping on Hungary’s foreign minister. Some interference indeed. The hypocrisy would be funny if it weren’t so sad.

In Brussels, meanwhile, under the overall umbrella of the “European Democracy Shield” (EDS) initiative and the Digital Services Act (DSA), a so-called Rapid Response mechanism has been activated to – so the official brief tells us – combat disinformation and foreign influence. Yet, in reality, this is a set of compulsory measures that permit the Commission’s dependent auxiliaries to police social media platforms, suppress content in favor of Orban and, thus, promote his rivals.

What makes all of this particularly dreadful is not simply that it is so almost comically Orwellian: The “European Democracy Shield” is really a shield to protect the EU’s unelected bureaucrat rulers and their ideologized technocrats from democracy as a recent report has correctly argued. Its tools, from so-called “fact-checking” to systematic denunciation by “trusted flaggers” to “prebunking” – that is AI-based preventative propaganda campaigns – amount to a box of horrors.

Yet what is even worse is that all of this is only a small part of a much larger and long-term strategy that has been gathering steam for a decade already. The “European Democracy Shield” and the DSA exist in a large, constantly pullulating eco-system of narrative control that also includes, for instance, a “Defense of Democracy Package,” a “European Democracy Action Plan,” and a Digital Markets Act. Attached to this weaponized spearhead for manufacturing Brussels consent is an extensive – and very expensive – train of so-called civil-society organizations and NGOs that provide both censorship assistance and indoctrination.

Hungary, put simply, is a harbinger of more and even worse to come, of what Brussels wants for our future. The EU ‘elites’ are displaying an unbroken will to power over what we are allowed to think, say, and vote for. That is why – whether you like or dislike Viktor Orban – and I heartily dislike him because of his outrageous siding with genocidal Israel – you should certainly greatly dislike and resist the methods that the EU is fielding to stop him. Because they are coming for all of us.


Tarik Cyril Amar is a historian from Germany working at Koç University, Istanbul, on Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe, the history of World War II, the cultural Cold War, and the politics of memory.

March 28, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Corruption, Full Spectrum Dominance, Progressive Hypocrite, Russophobia | , , , , , , | Comments Off on Battle for Hungary: EU attacks on Orban are a sign of worse things to come

German journalist threatened with homelessness as German court upholds EU sanctions in landmark free speech case

‘Socio-economic death sentence’ 

Remix News – March 27, 2026

The Frankfurt am Main District Court in Germany has recently upheld a German bank’s decision to maintain the suspension of accounts belonging to Berlin-based journalist Hüseyin Doğru, who is known for his pro-Palestinian news coverage. The ruling rejected an urgent application by the journalist, who is currently facing the threat of homelessness due to EU sanctions. The court’s decision means Dogru remains without the necessary funds for rent or basic daily needs.

The legal battle surrounding Hüseyin Doğru has sparked intense political debate in Germany, with critics describing the case as a “socio-economic death sentence” and a dangerous precedent for press freedom. Certainly, these EU sanctions, which can freeze bank accounts, can be used to effectively target dissident journalists across the EU in the coming years.

According to the German court order, there was no right that would entitle Doğru, who has a Turkish background but also has German citizenship, to continue using his bank account while under sanctions. Berliner Zeitung reported that the judge determined that the situation lacked the “prerequisite for intervention in the urgent procedure” because “Doğru has no enforceable right to have the bank release the transfers it has requested.”

The impact of this ruling on Doğru’s personal life is severe. Expressing his concern for his family’s future, Doğru stated, “The risk of ending up on the streets with three children is a concrete threat.”

The paper notes that his “authorized €506 per month makes it impossible to support a family of five. Moreover, he cannot freely dispose of even that amount. The situation could become existential.”

While German law technically allows for a monthly subsistence allowance — cited in late 2025 as €506 — Doğru’s lawyers have had to repeatedly sue banks just to gain access to this minimum amount. His attorney, Alexander Gorski, described these tactics as a “war of attrition” designed to make social and economic participation “factually impossible.”

He also noted the extreme difficulty of maintaining a normal life under these conditions, remarking that “paying bills is practically impossible for me.”

Doğru has been on an EU sanctions list since May 2025, with Brussels arguing that his pro-Palestinian journalistic work incites “ethnic, political, and religious discord” and therefore, he allegedly supports “destabilizing activities by Russia.” Notably, he filmed a number of the occupations of Berlin universities by pro-Palestinian activists.

Doğru has denied these allegations, pointing out that he ended his previous employment with a Russian-funded outlet following the invasion of Ukraine and has publicly criticized the conflict.

Remix News already covered developments in this story at the end of January of this year.

At the time, Doğru, a left-wing journalist, said: “Not only I, but also my wife and my three children are effectively being sanctioned.”

“The sanctions themselves stipulate that I am entitled to access to essential funds. The fact that my bank is nevertheless blocking these funds violates applicable law in my view,” he continued.

The basis for the sanctions was his alleged connections to Russia, but the Berliner Zeitung indicated that so far, no proof has been presented to confirm this accusation, and more importantly, there was no trial or evidence provided to support this accusation.

“Brussels justifies the measures by saying that he is using his pro-Palestinian journalistic work to stir up ‘ethnic, political and religious discord’ and thus allegedly ‘destabilizing activities that support Russia.’ The EU has not yet publicly provided any concrete evidence of a connection to Moscow,” wrote the paper at the time.

There are now fears that the extraordinary case may be a sign of where the future is headed, where an authoritarian EU can censor and financially ruin dissidents and journalists with no oversight or judicial review. Notably, similar sanctions could also be deployed against others, such as Roger Köppel, the Swiss editor-in-chief of the weekly Die Weltwoche.

In a formal inquiry from the newspaper Junge Welt, the German Ministry of Economic Affairs clarified the severity of the “provision ban.” They stated that a sanctioned individual may receive “no economic benefit whatsoever,” including wages. This interpretation effectively bars any German company from hiring Doğru, as paying him would constitute a criminal offense.

An MP of the left-wing Social Democrats (SPD) Macit Karaahmetoğlu, defended the government’s position in the case and the sanctions, noting it was established to target those undermining “the security, stability, independence and integrity” of the EU. He emphasized that the German government “actively worked to establish and strengthen” this specific regime to counter hybrid threats.

Legal experts and journalists, however, have compared Doğru’s situation to “internal exile.” Since he is a German citizen, he cannot be deported, but the sanctions have stripped him of his identity card and barred him from all forms of employment.

Even friends and family who would like to donate money to Doğru could be targeted with criminal charges.

March 27, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Comments Off on German journalist threatened with homelessness as German court upholds EU sanctions in landmark free speech case

Hungary blasts ‘fake’ EU accusation

RT | March 23, 2026

Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has denied and condemned claims that he leaked the details of EU meetings to Moscow.

The allegations were reported by the Washington Post and Politico some three weeks prior to the Hungarian parliamentary election scheduled for April 12.

On Friday, the WaPo cited security officials claiming that Szijjarto had made regular phone calls during breaks at EU meetings to provide Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov with “live reports on what had been discussed.”

On Sunday, Politico echoed the allegations, citing unnamed diplomats and officials who said Brussels had begun limiting the flow of confidential material to Hungary, forcing leaders to meet in smaller groups amid concerns that Budapest might leak sensitive information to the Kremlin.

“Instead of spreading lies and fake news, come to Budapest to support the opposition! Last time it worked… for us,” Szijjarto said Sunday in a post on X, responding to a comment by Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, who argued that the new allegations “shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone.”

The Hungarian foreign minister earlier stated that Tusk was “the star speaker at the opposition rally” four years ago, stressing that back then Prime Minister Viktor Orban and his Fidesz party had won the election by 20%.

Szijjarto also criticized his Polish counterpart, Radoslaw Sikorski, over a similar remark, accusing Warsaw of “spreading lies to support the [opposition] Tisza Party and install a pro-war puppet government in Hungary.”

Orban has been at odds with Brussels over his criticism of open-border migration and what he calls a “suicidal” plan to admit Ukraine to the bloc.

Hungary’s prime minister and Vladimir Zelensky are involved in a standoff over the Ukrainian leader’s claim that he is unable to send Russian oil to Hungary. In return, Orban has refused to green light a €90 billion debt facility Brussels wants for Ukraine.

March 23, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception | , | Comments Off on Hungary blasts ‘fake’ EU accusation

How the US-Israeli aggression against Iran is affecting the war in Ukraine

By Dmitri Kovalevich | Al Mayadeen | March 22, 2026

In the second half of March, the US and Israeli aggression against Iran is taking its toll on Ukraine. Retail stores are updating their prices daily, while the government is unable to keep gasoline prices in check through threats against sellers, as operators simply hide their product, creating artificial shortages.

Following the rapid deindustrialization that accompanied ‘independent’ Ukraine’s secession from the Soviet Union in the early 1990s, the only remaining productive industry in the country is agriculture, specifically, the production of grain and corn for export. Ukrainian authorities now face a harsh choice: supply fuel to agrarians at the start of this year’s planting season, or divert dwindling fuel supplies to meet the needs of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. According to Defense Minister Denys Shmyhal, supplying the Armed Forces of Ukraine remains the priority, in order that the proxy war by Western powers against the Russian Federation may continue.

He stated on March 1: “The war in Iran has triggered a global fuel crisis. Our key task is to supply the army. Sowing is the second priority. After that come businesses and people.”

European fuel suppliers have reduced their supplies to Ukraine in order to meet demand in their own markets. Fuel shipments from Poland have been suspended for one week, while Romania and Moldova have also temporarily halted fuel exports. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán already halted sales of diesel fuel and gasoline to Ukraine in February due to Ukraine’s disruption of the Druzhba pipeline from Russia.

As a result, Ukraine may be forced to seek fuel in more distant markets… and pay much higher prices for it. It is becoming increasingly clear that the Western imperialist powers cannot sustain two wars at once—one against Russia, the other against Iran.

Danylo Getmantsev, head of Ukraine’s legislative committee on tax policy, says that Ukraine could face serious fuel shortages as early as April if the war with Iran drags on. “According to analysts of the Ukrainian fuel market, the situation with a shortage of fuel and lubricants may arise in our country in April,” he said in early March. To counter this, Getmantsev proposes exploring opportunities to establish a strategic reserve of petroleum products in partner countries.

Andriy Gerus, head of the energy committee of the Ukrainian legislature, noted earlier in March that due to Russia’s shelling of oil depots, Ukraine has no remaining strategic fuel reserves. “Everything is operating on a just-in-time basis; there are no remaining stocks of cheaper resources, so any price change in Europe quickly translates into a price change in Ukraine.” He explains that fuel in Ukraine will always be more expensive than in Europe.

Legislator Oleksandr Dubinsky, currently in jail accused of treason, believes that due to the war against Iran, the economic situation in Ukraine has become critical, much like it was in February 2022 at the start of the war. “Society and the army are exhausted. Exchange rates, energy costs, and prices have risen. The budget deficit is widening. At the same time, uncertainty is growing,” Dubinsky explains.

Nevertheless, according to Dubinsky, officials in Kiev believe that Ukraine is seen as too important in the global game to be allowed to fail, so money for its survival as a Western vassal will be found regardless of the widespread corruption that has further overwhelmed the Ukrainian economy beginning in 2022.

Legislator Yuriy Boyko says that if oil reaches $200 per barrel, everyone will feel the impact. “In that case, the planting season will be at risk, and prices for goods will rise sharply. Ukrainians aren’t well-off to begin with, so we can’t let that happen,” the lawmaker says.

Another legislator, Mykhailo Tsymbaliuk, has stated that high gasoline prices are already affecting the country’s military capabilities. According to him, the fuel being allocated by the Ministry of Defense is insufficient for the armed forces, causing grave problems. Even evacuations of wounded soldiers are being compromised. “The skyrocketing price of gasoline has become a serious warning sign for the Armed Forces of Ukraine,” the lawmaker warns.

Ukraine’s European supporters will continue for some time to divert fuel resources away from their own needs in order to supply the Ukrainian Armed Forces with gasoline, even at the expense of their own citizens. However, with every passing week and month that the war with Iran continues, the cost of such assistance will rise sharply for them.

In March, Ukrainian lawmakers told Ukrainian media that European governments are urging them to assure Ukraine keeps fighting Russia for another year-and-a-half to two years. “The Europeans have told us ‘Keep fighting for another year and a half to two years; we’ll provide the money you need’”, reports the publication Zerkalo Nedeli on March 12.

Under such pressure, Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelenskyy has tasked the political leadership in the national legislature to continue functioning for several more years without an electoral mandate. The last national election Ukraine took place in April 2019, with a five-year mandate. It featured the banning of political parties deemed to be sympathetic to dialogue and good relations with Russia, a feature of the system that took power in February 2014 following a violent coup spearheaded by neo-Nazi paramilitaries.

To so many Ukrainians, the urgings and hidden threats by the leaders of ‘civilized Europe’ mean they will continue to be abducted from their own streets for two more years by the recruiters of Kiev’s compulsory military service.

None of the possible scenarios cited by Ukrainian military experts envisage a Russian defeat or the recapture of territories lost by Ukraine. In other words, the sole result of scenarios for continued war being urged is continued destruction of the Ukrainian population, all politely funded by European/NATO-member governments.

This approach speaks volumes about the overall strategy of Kiev and its Western allies. Theirs is a ‘strategy’ of holding out for a while longer without any long-term expectation of peace, hoping for some ‘black swan’ event (‘extremely rare and unpredictable’) that will drastically change the geopolitical situation. In other words, Western imperialism and its Ukrainian stooges are pinning their hopes on a miracle that might save them all.

Ukraine’s European ‘allies’, in truth, currently lack the funds to continue the war in Ukraine. They are negotiating a €90 billion loan for the country, but as mentioned above, European Union member Hungary is currently blocking this proposal.

Meanwhile, on March 18, Ukrainian media, citing a US State Department report, reported that USAID auditors have uncovered irregularities in the oversight of the more than $30 billion in direct budget support to Kiev since February 2022. There are a great many corruption scandals festering in Ukraine, but none have acted as grounds for refusing further loans and financial aid, despite the evidence that much of that could be embezzled.

Zelenskyy told the BBC during a visit to Britain on March 17 (which included a warm welcome by the British monarchy) that the war in Iran raises ominous forebodings about Ukraine’s future. Yet as Ukrainian media has noted, Zelensky is a firm supporter of that war.

In a speech to the annual Munich Security Conference on February 14, Zelensky called for measures to “immediately stop” Iran, without any delay. “Regimes like the one in Iran must not be given time. When they have time, they only kill more. They must be stopped immediately.”

Then, on February 27, he told an interview with Sky News that he supported an operation to depose the Iranian leadership.

Ukraine’s European allies are currently concerned with how to win back Donald Trump’s favor and persuade him to continue funding the Zelensky-led government in Kiev. Finnish President Alexander Stubb fears that negotiations on Ukraine are approaching a “moment of truth” that could force Kiev to formally cede territory in the Donbass region to Moscow. (Populations there voted in 2022 and before that to secede from coup Ukraine and join the Russian Federation.)

Europe, Stubb says, finds itself in a difficult position due to reductions in direct US aid to Ukraine. He proposes an odd trade-off to resolve this dilemma, namely, an ‘exchange’ of military assistance by Ukraine to the US and “Israel” in the Strait of Hormuz in exchange for continued assistance to Kiev’s war. That includes a proposal that the European Union agree to provide the US with military assistance to unblock the Strait of Hormuz in exchange for increases in direct US supplies to Ukraine.

But this is wishful thinking. The European Union member-countries of NATO lack the military capabilities required to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. They do have experience (gained during the Ukrainian crisis) in buying time and ‘bogging down’ the crisis in the Middle East through numerous rounds of fruitless negotiations with Iran. The essence of the EU approach would see the Iranian side fulfilling certain conditions in the here and now, while the West and its allies promise to ‘do something’ to normalize relations, but at a later time.

During the war in Ukraine, we witnessed endless negotiations in this vein under the ‘Minsk-1’ and ‘Minsk-2’ agreements in 2014 and early 2015. Then there was the ‘grain deal’ of July 2022, whereby the Russian navy would allow Ukraine to export grain from Black Sea ports. In all these cases, Ukraine and the West failed to fulfill their part of the commitments.

Oleg Yasinsky, a Ukrainian political analyst now living in Chile, commented on March 19 about the resistance of the Iranian people to aggression and the tradition of deception to which the West has consistently resorted during negotiations following military failures. “Once upon a time, the ancestors of today’s democratic world leaders negotiated with Indigenous peoples as they plundered and conquered them. At peace-signing ceremonies with the indigenous peoples of Patagonia, poison-laced whale carcasses were served at the table, while in the cold mountains of North America, smallpox-infected blankets and clothing were given as gifts to original peoples.

“Today, from Minsk for Russia to Geneva for Iran, the peacemaking traditions of the ‘civilized world’ have not changed one bit in all this time. Therefore and unfortunately,” he concludes, “missiles are the only real negotiators today.”

Zelensky is now desperately traveling around the world seeking to regain attention for his government as Iran becomes the main topic of global media. He is ‘jumping on the bandwagon’ of war against Iran in efforts to render some valuable service to Western imperialism and prove his continued usefulness. He has offered Ukrainian troops to guard “Israel” and Western military bases in the Gulf and in Cyprus. Alas for him, Trump has dismissed his obsequious ‘servant,’ going so far as to say that “Zelensky is the last person from whom we would need help.”

According to Odessa-based anarchist Vyacheslav Azarov, Ukraine is scrambling to align itself with the dominant theme in international politics and position itself as a useful part of the crisis exploding in the Middle East. Demands for additional support to Kiev are being delivered from this new vantage point. However, in the end, Kiev may simply end up with “additional airstrikes accompanied by the friendly shrieking of minor allies who have no real influence” and a large, new adversary in the form of Iran.”

Zelensky’s humiliating traveling and messaging does not go unnoticed in Ukraine. But the pompous president, who sees himself as a sage colonialist in the style of Winston Churchill and is continuously applauded by the governments of European countries, turns out to be a frightened servant, fearing that his ‘masters’ may abandon him. The war waged by Western imperialism against the Iranian people has once again underscored the weakness and dubious value of Zelensky’s government, whose image the West has artificially inflated for years through its media.

March 22, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Economics, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on How the US-Israeli aggression against Iran is affecting the war in Ukraine

Angela Lipps Spent 108 Days in Jail Because a Facial Recognition Algorithm Was Wrong

By Regina Morrison | Reclaim The Net | March 20, 2026

Angela Lipps spent nearly six months in jail because an algorithm looked at surveillance footage and decided she matched the suspect. She had never been to North Dakota. She had never been on a plane. A facial recognition system said otherwise, and police took that as enough.

Lipps, a 50-year-old mother and grandmother from north-central Tennessee, was arrested at her home in July while babysitting four children. US marshals arrived with guns drawn. She was booked as a fugitive from justice.

“I’ve never been to North Dakota, I don’t know anyone from North Dakota,” she told WDAY News.

The case began with bank fraud in Fargo.

Between April and May 2025, someone used a fake US Army military ID to withdraw tens of thousands of dollars from banks across the city. Detectives pulled surveillance footage of a woman at the counters. They fed that footage into facial recognition software. The software returned a name: Angela Lipps.

A detective wrote in court documents that Lipps appeared to match the suspect based on facial features, body type, and hairstyle.

That assessment, made by software and rubber-stamped in a report, was treated as sufficient cause for arrest. Nobody from the Fargo police called Lipps before the marshals showed up at her door.

She sat in a Tennessee county jail for 108 days waiting for North Dakota to arrange her transport. No bail. Four counts of unauthorized use of personal identifying information. Four counts of theft. The algorithm had spoken.

Her attorney, Jay Greenwood, told InForum: “If the only thing you have is facial recognition, I might want to dig a little deeper.”

Fargo police did not dig deeper. What eventually cleared Lipps was her bank records, which showed she had been more than 1,200 miles away in Tennessee during every transaction investigators said she committed in North Dakota. Greenwood obtained those records and brought them to the investigators. Lipps was released on Christmas Eve.

The story didn’t end there. While locked up and unable to pay bills, Lipps lost her home, her car, and her dog. When Fargo police released her, they didn’t arrange her trip back to Tennessee. Defense attorneys helped cover a hotel room and food over Christmas. A local nonprofit, the F5 Project, got her home.

As of the reporting from InForum, nobody from the Fargo police department had apologized.

This is how facial recognition operates: it generates a match, law enforcement acts on it, and the burden of disproving a computer’s guess falls entirely on the person whose life gets upended.

Lipps had to produce documentary evidence of her own location to escape charges based on software that was simply wrong.

The Lipps case is not unusual. Last October, an AI system at a Baltimore school identified a bag of Doritos as a firearm and notified police.

Officers arrived armed at Kenwood High School, forced student Taki Allen to his knees, handcuffed him, and searched him. They found nothing.

In the UK, Shaun Thompson, 39, had just finished a volunteer shift with Street Fathers, a group dedicated to steering young people away from knife crime, when the Metropolitan Police’s live facial recognition cameras flagged him outside London Bridge station.

Officers detained him for nearly half an hour, demanded his fingerprints, and threatened arrest, even as he produced multiple forms of ID proving he wasn’t the person they were looking for. “They were telling me I was a wanted man, trying to get my fingerprints and trying to scare me with arrest, even though I knew and they knew the computer had got it wrong,” he said.

Thompson is now bringing the first legal challenge of its kind against the Metropolitan Police’s use of live facial recognition. The man the algorithm flagged as a criminal was spending his evening trying to prevent crime. The technology made no distinction.

What these cases share is a common architecture. A system makes an identification, human oversight treats that identification as reliable, and the person flagged has no recourse until significant damage has already been done.

March 21, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , | Comments Off on Angela Lipps Spent 108 Days in Jail Because a Facial Recognition Algorithm Was Wrong

FBI Resumes Buying Americans’ Location Data Without Warrants

The law stops the government from taking your location data, it says nothing about buying it.

By Ken Macon | Reclaim The Net | March 19, 2026

The FBI is buying Americans’ location data again. Director Kash Patel confirmed it to lawmakers on Wednesday, confirming what we already knew: that it has resumed purchasing commercial surveillance data, including detailed location histories, from data brokers.

The brokers feeding that data pipeline source much of it from phone apps and games that people use daily without realizing they’re being tracked.

By the time a precise location record reaches a federal agency, it may have originated from a weather app or a mobile game, passed through an advertising middleman, and been packaged for resale, with the person who generated it never consulted or notified.

Senator Ron Wyden asked Patel directly whether the FBI would commit to not buying Americans’ location data without a warrant. Patel declined. The agency “uses all tools… to do our mission,” he told the committee.

He followed up by confirming that “we do purchase commercially available information that is consistent with the Constitution and the laws under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,” adding that it “has led to some valuable intelligence for us.”

Wyden called that arrangement exactly what it is: the government buying what it cannot legally seize. Purchasing information on Americans without a warrant is “an outrageous end-run around the Fourth Amendment,” he said, referring to the constitutional protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.

The workaround is not unique to the FBI. Federal agencies are generally required to convince a judge that probable cause exists before demanding private records from a tech or phone company.

The commercial data market offers a way around that requirement entirely. Agencies simply purchase what they would otherwise need a warrant to obtain, creating a market for data grabbing and exploiting a legal gap that courts have not yet addressed.

Wyden and other lawmakers introduced the Government Surveillance Reform Act last week, which would require a court-authorized warrant before any federal agency can purchase Americans’ data from brokers. The bill is bipartisan and bicameral. Without it, the gap that lets agencies buy their way around the Fourth Amendment remains open.

March 19, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Comments Off on FBI Resumes Buying Americans’ Location Data Without Warrants

Israeli Journalist Demands Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens Be Placed in WWII-Style Internment Camps

The Talmudic mask comes off

José Niño Unfiltered | March 17, 2026

The landscape of American free speech has entered treacherous new terrain. On February 27, 2026, an Israeli historian and journalist named Yair Kleinbaum published an editorial in JFeed demanding that the United States government arrest and detain Tucker Carlson, Nick Fuentes, Candace Owens, Cenk Uygur, Jackson Hinkle, and other prominent commentators who have opposed American military action against Iran. The model he proposed for their imprisonment was the World War II internment of Japanese Americans.

“It’s time to put Fuentes, Owens, Carlson and Uygur inside a WWII-Style internment camp,” Kleinbaum wrote. “We have reached a point where there is no choice but to take decisive action and arrest them.”

Kleinbaum’s argument rested on the claim that these commentators had crossed from protected speech into criminal incitement by allegedly encouraging soldiers to defy orders and discouraging enlistment. He explicitly compared them to Japanese Americans during World War II, though he distinguished the cases by asserting that unlike those who were “unjustly profiled,” the targeted influencers had “proven that their loyalty is with anti-American forces.”

“Just as the Japanese-American population was suspected of loyalty to a murderous Japanese regime that had declared war on America during World War II, these figures, including Jackson Hinkle and others, have, unlike most those Japanese who were unjustly profiled, proven that their loyalty is with anti-American forces,” Kleinbaum wrote. “Hence their call for mutiny.”

Kleinbaum himself is a graduate student at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in the Department of History of the Jewish People and Contemporary Jewry. He also served as a research assistant in the Jewish Peoplehood department at The Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya, now Reichman University. His academic work focuses on the history of the Israeli political left between 1967 and 1973.

For perspective, JFeed is an English language news platform founded in 2023 and led by CEO Yarit Elbaz and Editor in Chief Eli Gotthelf, who previously worked at Kikar HaShabbat, an Israeli Haredi news outlet. The platform describes itself as “proudly unfiltered, proudly Jewish, and proudly committed to conservative values,” with the stated mission of becoming “the leading English-language news source for global Jewry.” Kleinbaum serves as one of the platform’s most prolific writers, covering breaking news on the Iran conflict, antisemitism analysis, and U.S. Israel relations.

Kleinbaum’s call for internment is not a fringe view among the American Jewish community. Multiple surveys reveal a community deeply divided on these questions. A CHIP50 survey in 2024 found that 39 percent of American Jews supported restrictions “prohibiting speech that opposes Israel’s existence as a Jewish state” on college campuses, compared to only 21 percent of non-Jews.

Forward-CHIP50 poll in 2024 found 31 percent of Jews supported “prohibiting certain political speech” on campus, while 47 percent were opposed. Separately, 44 percent supported banning statements of support for Hamas, and 58 percent supported using law enforcement to police campus demonstrations.

The Japanese American internment that Kleinbaum cited as his model represents one of the most egregious violations of civil liberties in American history. Following the attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941, President Franklin Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066, which authorized the forced removal of approximately 120,000 people of Japanese ancestry from the West Coast. The majority were American citizens. They were imprisoned in remote camps surrounded by barbed wire and armed guards, losing their homes, businesses, and livelihoods.

Decades later, the United States government formally apologized for this injustice. In 1988, President Ronald Reagan signed the Civil Liberties Act, which acknowledged that the internment was based on “race prejudice, war hysteria, and a failure of political leadership.” The government paid reparations to surviving internees.

An even more insidious aspect of the Japanese internment that is often overlooked by court historians is how Jewish individuals benefited from the Roosevelt administration’s internment policy. Gus Russo’s 2006 book Supermob: How Sidney Korshak and His Criminal Associates Became America’s Hidden Power Brokers contains a chapter that directly addresses the seizure and sale of Japanese American properties during WWII.

Russo’s book details how the Office of Alien Property Custodian (OAP), headed by David L. Bazelon—a well-connected Chicago attorney and son of Russian-Jewish immigrants—oversaw the liquidation of seized Japanese American (and German-owned) properties after the war. According to Russo, Bazelon sold many of these properties to associates linked to Chicago mob lawyer Sidney Korshak—also of Jewish extraction—and members of the Pritzker family for pennies on the dollar. Russo identifies David Bazelon as running the OAP and controlling the disposition of properties collectively worth an estimated $400 million in 1942 dollars (billions today), including half a million acres of California farmland and some 1,265 small Japanese-owned hotels.

Jay Pritzker — patriarch of the Hyatt hotel fortune — was hired as an assistant attorney at the OAP under Bazelon and allegedly profited from the fire-sale liquidations. The broader network Russo calls the “Supermob” — a cadre of mostly Chicago-connected figures with ties to organized crime — acquired California land, hotels, and urban parcels through these OAP sales.

Back to Kleinbaum, his demand for the state detention of Israel’s vocal critics reflects a deepening panic within the Jewish community following the October 7 conflict. The graphic, public nature of those events triggered a global realization, driving millions to critically examine the extent and nature of Jewish influence in their own nations. This shift signifies that the traditional methods of social control—specifically the use of guilt-based Holocaust tropes to silence dissent—have lost their efficacy. As Jewry’s reliance on soft power through propaganda falters, they are increasingly turning to the hard power of state-sanctioned speech suppression.

What appears as the reactionary outburst of a single, traumatized Jewish intellectual may signal a shift toward a broader, more aggressive strategy intended to crush the burgeoning opposition to Jewish hegemony across the West. These efforts to institutionalize censorship are a testament to the fragility of a crumbling Judeo-American order. The truth is no longer a hidden secret, and the attempt to force it back into the shadows is a battle that world Jewry is poised to lose once gentiles wake up from their slumber.

March 18, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Comments Off on Israeli Journalist Demands Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens Be Placed in WWII-Style Internment Camps

Brussels wants ‘our sons to die for Ukraine’ – Orban

RT | March 16, 2026

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has accused Brussels of dragging the EU into a direct war with Russia through potential troop deployments to Ukraine.

Speaking at the ‘Peace March’ in Budapest on Sunday, which drew tens of thousands of supporters, Orban said Brussels had taken “the war upon itself” and was pursuing a wartime economic policy.

“They do not want to keep trouble at a distance – they want to march into it: more money, more weapons, more soldiers. We do not know the day or the hour when the first soldier from Brussels will step onto Ukrainian soil, but it will happen. They can hardly wait for soldiers bearing EU insignia to be sent,” he said.

He stressed the importance of renewing “the anti-war alliance” forged by his government, pledging to “preserve Hungary as an island of security and calm.”

“Our sons will not die for Ukraine; they will live for Hungary,” Orban said. “We will protect support for mothers, we will protect our children, and we will not allow our national colors to be replaced with Ukrainian or rainbow flags.”

Orban also claimed that “enormous forces” are trying to pressure Hungary politically and economically to “push the country off its own path” by blocking funding and affordable energy supplies. He accused Brussels of trying to turn Hungarians into “debt servants” to fund the war effort, “using Ukraine as a pretext,” and seeking a change of government in Budapest because his administration refuses to hand over “the keys to the treasury.”

The Orban government has long opposed the EU’s policy of arming and funding Ukraine against Russia, as well as Kyiv’s bid to join the bloc. Tensions between Budapest and Kyiv have escalated in recent months after Ukraine suspended Russian oil supplies to Hungary and Slovakia via a Soviet-built pipeline, while Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has also issued personal threats against Orban.

March 16, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Militarism | , , , | Comments Off on Brussels wants ‘our sons to die for Ukraine’ – Orban