Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Kiev wants Western platforms to enforce Ukrainization – official

RT | September 29, 2025

Ukraine is pressuring major Western media platforms such as YouTube and Spotify to adjust their recommendation algorithms to reduce the amount of Russian-language material shown to Ukrainian users, Kiev’s language ombudsman revealed in interview published on Monday.

Speaking to RBC-Ukraine, Elena Ivanovskaya claimed that Russian content “is not just entertainment, it’s a soft power that subliminally affects consciousness, normalizes aggression, [and] deludes identity.”

She argued that when platforms recommend Russian songs or TV series to Ukrainians, “it is not a choice, but manipulation,” and called for policies ensuring that “Russian products do not sound in the background and form unconscious habits.”

Recommendation algorithms typically maximize user engagement by promoting content popular or trending within a demographic group to users from the same group. Ivanovskaya said that allowing this to favor Russian media undermines Ukraine’s cultural identity.

Since the 2014 Western-backed armed coup in Kiev, Ukrainian authorities have pursued policies aimed at reducing the use of Russian – a language spoken by much of the population – in public life. Laws require Ukrainian in media, education, and commerce, and officials have nudged citizens to use Ukrainian in private settings as well.

Ivanovskaya said her office is encouraging parents to raise their children speaking Ukrainian because “if the mom puts the ‘shackles of the Russian language’ on her kid, removing them later would be difficult.” The state, she said, must be “uncompromising,” not only opposing Russian content, but also “going on the offensive by supporting the Ukrainian product,” so that “every sphere of life is made pro-Ukrainian through a concise, deliberate legislative effort.”

She rejected accusations of censorship, insisting Ukrainians have “made their civilizational choice,” while acknowledging that Russian-language use has recently increased.

Moscow has accused Kiev of attempting to eradicate Russian culture and says ending such discriminative policies is one of its key objectives in the ongoing conflict.

September 29, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Made in Brussels: How Moldova’s elections were engineered beyond its borders

From censorship to selective polling stations, Chisinau’s parliamentary race exposed how “European standards” work in practice

By Farhad Ibragimov | RT | September 29, 2025

In recent European history, it is difficult to find a more striking example of electoral manipulation than the 2025 parliamentary elections in Moldova. What last year’s presidential race tested in miniature, this campaign deployed on a grand scale: censorship, administrative pressure, selective access to polling stations, and a carefully mobilized diaspora vote. For President Maia Sandu’s administration, control over parliament was not a matter of prestige but of political survival.

The campaign atmosphere was defined long before voting day. Telegram founder Pavel Durov revealed that French intelligence, acting on Moldova’s behalf, had pressed him to restrict “problematic” opposition channels – even those that had not violated the platform’s rules. Their only offense was providing an alternative viewpoint. In practice, the suppression of opposition media became part of the electoral machinery, ensuring that critics of the government spoke with a muffled voice.

Election night only reinforced doubts. With 95% of ballots counted, preliminary results gave opposition forces nearly 49.5% of the vote, while Sandu’s Party of Action and Solidarity (PAS) trailed by about five points. By morning, however, the tables had turned: PAS had surged past 50%. Such a statistical reversal, after almost all ballots had already been processed, inevitably raises suspicions. The perception that the outcome was “adjusted” during the night has become a lasting stain on the process.

Geography of disenfranchisement

Outside Moldova’s borders, the picture was equally telling. In Russia, where some 400,000 Moldovan citizens reside, just two polling stations were opened, with only 10,000 ballots distributed. Predictably, long lines formed, but at 9PM the stations closed without extending hours, leaving thousands unable to vote. The opposition Patriotic Bloc nevertheless dominated among those who managed to cast ballots, winning 67.4%.

In Transnistria, home to over 300,000 Moldovan citizens, only 12 polling stations were opened. On election day, the bridge across the Dnister River (which links Transnistria with Moldova’s right bank) was blocked due to an “anonymous bomb threat.” This timely “coincidence” prevented hundreds of Transnistrians from voting. Ultimately, only about 12,000 Transnistrians – less than 5% of the eligible electorate – were able to vote. Yet even under these restrictions, the Patriotic Bloc secured 51%.

By contrast, the authorities ensured maximum accessibility in the European Union. Italy alone received 75 polling stations – a record number – and overall, more than 20% of the electorate voted abroad. Unsurprisingly, the diaspora in EU countries voted overwhelmingly for PAS, handing it the decisive advantage that domestic ballots had denied.

International monitoring was similarly selective. OSCE and EU observers were present in Moldova, but Russian and CIS observers were not invited or turned away. Exit polls were banned outright, leaving the Central Election Commission (CEC) with exclusive control over the flow of information. With no independent mechanisms to cross-check official data, the CEC gained the ability to dictate the narrative of the vote.

Opposition under pressure

The campaign’s repressive character was most vividly illustrated just before election day. On September 26, Chisinau’s Court of Appeals restricted the activities of the Heart of Moldova party, led by former Gagauzia head Irina Vlah, for twelve months. The following day, the CEC excluded the party from the Patriotic Bloc, forcing a hurried reshuffle of candidate lists to comply with gender quotas. Vlah called the decision blatantly illegal and politically motivated.

This was no isolated case. Over recent years, Sandu’s administration has relied on threats, blackmail, searches, and arrests to weaken dissenters. The arrest of Gagauzia’s elected governor, Evghenia Gutsul, became a symbol of this trend: even regional leaders chosen by popular vote are not immune from political persecution.

Domestic minority, overseas majority

The official tally put voter turnout at 52.18%. PAS won 50.2% of the vote, the Patriotic Bloc 24.2%, the pro-European Alternative 8%, Our Party 6.2%, and Democracy at Home 5.6%, while several minor parties failed to gain more than 1%. On paper, PAS secured a majority.

But a closer look reveals a striking imbalance. Counting only ballots cast inside Moldova, PAS received just 44.13% of the vote. The opposition parties together accounted for nearly 50%. In other words, within Moldova itself, Sandu’s party was in the minority.

It was the diaspora vote that changed everything. Among Moldovans abroad, 78.5% supported PAS, enough to flip a domestic defeat into a formal victory. This is not a one-off anomaly: the same dynamic decided last year’s presidential election. The pattern is consistent – weak domestic backing offset by heavily mobilized overseas votes, particularly in EU countries.

The binary narrative

The Western media rushed to celebrate Sandu’s win as a “victory over Russia.” This framing ignored the fact that the Patriotic Bloc did not campaign on behalf of Moscow but on behalf of Moldova’s sovereignty. Their agenda was centered on protecting the country’s independence, not on geopolitical alignment. Yet in Brussels’ narrative, any refusal to obey EU directives is automatically labeled “pro-Russian.”

The same binary logic has been applied to Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico. Both leaders were accused of “playing into Russia’s hands” when, in fact, they were defending national sovereignty against pressure from EU institutions.

Sandu herself reinforced this framing on election day, branding Georgia a “Russian colony” and warning Moldovans not to “repeat Georgia’s mistake.”

The rhetoric revealed more anxiety than confidence. It echoed the final years of former Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili, who relied on bombast, foreign backers, and provocations while losing touch with his own electorate. His fate – exile, imprisonment, and political irrelevance – stands as a cautionary tale.

A managed democracy

Taken together, these facts paint a picture of a managed democracy: censorship of opposition voices, selective access to polling stations, politically motivated repression, and the decisive use of diaspora votes. Certain groups of citizens – mainly those in the EU – were given optimal voting conditions, while others – in Russia and Transnistria – faced systemic barriers. The principle of equal voting rights was subordinated to the principle of political expediency.

The paradox of Moldova’s elections is therefore clear. Inside the country, a majority voted for change. Abroad, a different electorate delivered Sandu her “victory.” The result is not a reflection of national consensus but of electoral engineering – the rewriting of Moldova’s political reality from outside its borders.

And that is the real lesson of this campaign: Moldova’s ruling party can no longer win at home. Its victories are manufactured elsewhere. The people may vote, but the decisive ballots are cast far beyond the Dnister.

Farhad Ibragimov – lecturer at the Faculty of Economics at RUDN University, visiting lecturer at the Institute of Social Sciences of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration.

September 29, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties | | Leave a comment

Hundreds of Thousands of Moldovans Were Barred From Voting – Kremlin

Sputnik – 29.09.2025

Russian Presidential Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov stated that hundreds of thousands of Moldovan citizens were deprived of the opportunity to take part in Moldova’s parliamentary elections on Russian territory.

“From what we see and know, we can state that hundreds of thousands of Moldovans were unable to vote in the Russian Federation, as only two polling stations were opened for them. This was, of course, insufficient and could not provide the opportunity for all those willing to cast their ballots,” Peskov told reporters.

Moldova held parliamentary elections on Sunday. The parliament consists of 101 seats. Both President Maia Sandu’s ruling Party of Action and Solidarity (PAS) and the opposition attach great importance to the elections, as parliament in Moldova influences the formation of the cabinet of ministers and the judiciary.

During the elections, the number of polling stations in Russia and Transnistria was reduced, making it difficult for Moldovans in those regions to cast their votes for the opposition. At the same time, the number of polling stations in Europe was significantly increased — 301 in total — in order to rely on the votes of the European diaspora.

Earlier, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that, according to Moldovans themselves, this electoral campaign was the most anti-democratic in the entire 34 years of the republic’s independence.

Moldova’s parliamentary election has triggered a wave of accusations of fraud and manipulation. Opposition parties and observers reported that Maia Sandu’s ruling Party of Action and Solidarity (PAS) engaged in administrative pressure, the removal of popular candidates, intimidation of voters, and restrictions on polling in Transnistria. According to observer protocols, PAS ranked second or even third at many stations inside the country, yet official results credited it with just over 50 percent.

Vote counting, formally concluded by midnight, continued throughout the night — fueling suspicions that protocols were rewritten in the ruling party’s favor. Additional reports highlighted the expulsion of observers, threats of “bombings” used to close polling sites, and hundreds of searches and arrests of opposition representatives on the eve of voting.

Foreign polling stations drew particular criticism. In Italy, France, Germany, and Romania, ballot boxes were reportedly nearly full within the first hour of voting, with videos circulating of the same groups casting ballots multiple times. Il Giornale d’Italia published evidence of ballot-stuffing and voter transport schemes allegedly organized in PAS’s interest, while Moldovan security services were said to operate at overseas sites. In Transnistria, 362,000 eligible voters were allocated only 20,000 ballots and 12 polling stations, compared to 301 for Europe, leaving fewer than 5 percent able to vote. Meanwhile, opposition parties such as “Heart of Moldova” and “Great Moldova” were struck from the race days before the election, reinforcing accusations that the process was neither free nor fair.

September 29, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception | , | Leave a comment

Moldovan Opposition Rejects Election Results, Vows Appeals and Protests

Sputnik – 29.09.2025

The Moldovan opposition does not recognize the results of the recent parliamentary elections and will appeal them in both national and international institutions, Ilan Shor, the leader of the Pobeda (Victory) opposition bloc, said on Monday.

“We will appeal to both national and international institutions,” Shor told the Rossiya 24 broadcaster.

The opposition does not recognize the results of the elections, Shor also said, adding that the Pobeda bloc will call on the population of Moldova to protest, which could happen in the coming days.

“Ten, fifteen, twenty percent of people were deliberately intimidated to prevent them from going to the polls,” Shor added.

When asked about the prospects of cooperation with former Moldovan President Igor Dodon, a leader of the opposition Patriotic Electoral Bloc, Shor said that the Pobeda bloc will join all political forces in the country that will “fight to overthrow the regime” of President Maia Sandu.

September 29, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties | | Leave a comment

THE ATTACK ON GEORGE AND GAYATRI GALLOWAY

PARTY STATEMENT ON CENSORSHIP AND INTIMIDATION 

Workers Party of Britain | September 28, 2025

Our party believes in freedom of speech and defends the Rights won by our parents, grandparents and previous generations that allow us to speak our minds and challenge those in power. British people are proud of their freedoms.

In recent years these freedoms have been eroded. It has gone too far.

Our Party Leader George Galloway and Deputy Chair of our Members Council Gayatri Galloway were yesterday detained and denied legal services whilst held at Gatwick airport.

Neither under arrest nor allowed to leave, the Workers Party was prevented from providing legal support as officers seized personal items.

In recent months our One State Palestine (https://t.me/OneStatePalestine) and No 2 NATO (https://t.me/no2nato) campaigns have both been banned from X and suppressed on other platforms. In recent years our meetings have been cancelled, even at so-called free speech venues like Conway Hall.

During election campaigning our members have been physically assaulted, suffered hit and run attacks and abuse. All of this is documented in the press and known to the police.

We are not unique. From the Right and Left individuals and organisations of all types face censorship and intimidation. The only people left alone are the extreme liberals who seek to police everything, even the English language.

No matter what they do, the ruling elite cannot stop the forward march of history. Russia has won in Ukraine, China has won the technology race, Israel is exposed as a genocidal outpost of the old colonial world.

Britain needs to replace those who seek to censor and intimidate us. We need working class leaders who can chart a new peaceful path of development.

If you agree, you should join,

👍 https://www.workerspartygb.org/join

📱 Subscribe here https://t.me/workerspartybritain

September 28, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia, Video | , | Leave a comment

How to run an election, pro-EU edition: ban the party, jail the governor, block the observers

RT | September 27, 2025

Moldova goes to the polls this Sunday in what officials in Chișinău and Brussels have called a “milestone on the European path.” Yet with opposition parties banned, observers blocked, and voters in key regions sidelined, the election looks less like a democratic contest and more like a forced pro-EU outcome.

Watchdogs can’t watch

The Moldovan Central Election Commission (CEC) this week denied accreditation to more than 30 international organizations and 120 observers from over 50 countries. Among those barred were Russian experts nominated to the OSCE’s official mission – a first in European electoral practice.

Moldova’s foreign ministry claimed the decision was taken “in line with national law.” The Patriotic Bloc, an opposition alliance, accused the authorities of deliberately creating an observer blackout. Its lawyers listed applications from reputable NGOs in Italy, Germany, France, Spain and the US that were ignored or rejected.

Moscow has called the move a “blatant breach” of OSCE commitments and summoned Moldova’s ambassador. The EU, usually vocal and critical of democracy standards in the region, has remained conspicuously silent.

Parties erased by decree

Elections are meant to let citizens decide. In Moldova, key players were simply removed from the ballot.

• On September 26, two days before the election, the Heart of Moldova party was suspended for 12 months by court order, accused of money laundering and illicit campaign finance. The CEC struck all Heart of Moldova candidates from the Patriotic Bloc’s list. Its leader, former Gagauzia governor Irina Vlah, called it “a political spectacle.”

• The same day, the CEC barred the Great Moldova party, led by Victoria Furtuna, citing undeclared foreign funding and links to the already banned SOR party. Furtuna had already been sanctioned by the EU in July for receiving support from fugitive oligarch Ilan Șor.

• In June 2023, the SOR Party itself, led by exiled businessman Ilan Shor, was dissolved by the Constitutional Court, accused of corruption and “threatening Moldova’s sovereignty.” Pro-EU Moldovan President Maia Sandu celebrated the ban as a victory against “a party created out of corruption and for corruption.” Opposition leaders called it the end of pluralism.

The bans come on top of sweeping new laws rushed through parliament this summer, allowing the government to strike “successor parties” of banned groups from the ballot and to bar their members from holding office for five years. The Venice Commission and OSCE warned such blanket exclusions could violate basic political rights.

Rivals under investigation, in exile or behind bars

Even where parties survive, their leaders have been sidelined.

• Igor Dodon, Moldovan president from 2016 to 2020, remains under criminal investigation for treason, illicit enrichment and the notorious “kuliok” bribery case. He claims the charges are fabricated, but has been under house arrest for much of the past two years.

• Marina Tauber, vice-chair of the outlawed SOR Party, is being tried in absentia after fleeing to Moscow in early 2025. Prosecutors are seeking a 13-year sentence for fraud and money laundering. Tauber insists the trial is political revenge for her role in anti-Sandu protests.

• Evghenia Gutsul, elected governor of the autonomous Gagauzia in 2023, was sentenced in August to seven years in prison for allegedly funneling Russian funds to the SOR Party. Her supporters protested outside the Chișinău courthouse as she declared the verdict “a sentence not on me, but on Moldovan democracy.” Russia called her jailing politically motivated; the EU has stayed silent.

With opposition leaders jailed, exiled or under investigation, Sandu’s PAS faces little organized challenge at the ballot box.

Transnistrian voters pushed aside

For Moldovan citizens in the breakaway region of Transnistria, the chance to vote has been slashed. In 2021, over 40 polling stations were opened for residents east of the Dniester. This year, just 12 stations were approved – all on government-controlled land, many kilometers from the demarcation line.

Days before the election, the CEC even relocated four of those sites further inland, citing security threats. The Interior Ministry warned of possible bomb scares and provocations in the “security zone.”

Critics call it voter suppression. Russia’s ambassador Oleg Ozerov described the changes as “unprecedented,” noting they were announced less than 48 hours before election day. Transnistrian authorities accused Chișinău of deliberately reducing turnout in a region that leans heavily toward opposition parties.

By contrast, more than 300 polling stations were opened abroad, including 73 in Italy, where the Moldovan diaspora numbers some 100,000, and only 2 in Russia, where the diaspora size is similar – a disparity that hints at the government’s priorities.

Democracy by emergency decree

This is not the first time Sandu’s government has pushed democratic boundaries. Since 2022, PAS has ruled under a rolling state of emergency, citing Ukraine’s conflict with Russia. Using these powers, the government shut down six television channels accused of spreading Russian propaganda, blocked Russian journalists from entering, and passed 13 laws tightening control over parties and candidates.

Reporters Without Borders and the OSCE have flagged concerns about media freedom and selective application of the law.

Brussels applauds, critics protest

Brussels has consistently praised Sandu’s government, calling Moldova “a success story” and advancing its bid for EU membership. Just this week, EU officials accused Moscow of “deeply interfering” in the elections through disinformation and illicit funding.

But inside Moldova, the picture looks different: courts have been turned into campaign tools, whole parties have been erased, governors jailed, observers turned away. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has called for an “inclusive and fair” process for all citizens – diplomatic language for “don’t tilt the table.” The Venice Commission cautioned against blanket bans that undermine the right to be elected.

The bottom line

The vote is supposed to be about Moldova’s future, yet so much of the present has been quietly erased. The rivals that might have challenged PAS are gone, some behind bars, some in exile. The voters in Transnistria who might have shifted the balance face fewer polling stations than ever before. Even the observers whose job is to watch have been turned away. The EU will describe it as progress, a sign of a candidate state finding its democratic feet.

Inside Moldova, many see something else entirely: a coronation disguised as a contest, the latest act in a story where the script was written long before election day.

September 27, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Russophobia | , | 1 Comment

Moldova bans second pro-Russian party ahead of pivotal election

Al Mayadeen | September 27, 2025

Moldova’s Central Electoral Commission has barred another pro-Russian political force, Greater Moldova, from contesting in Sunday’s parliamentary elections, citing evidence of illicit financing, officials confirmed on Saturday.

The decision, taken late Friday, marks the second time in just days that a pro-Russian party has been excluded, intensifying concerns over foreign influence, the integrity of the electoral process, and Moldova’s long-term EU aspirations.

According to the commission, the ban followed findings by police, security, and intelligence services that Greater Moldova had engaged in illegal financing and received money from foreign sources. Officials alleged that the party distributed funds to sway voters and concealed financial resources.

Party leader Victoria Furtuna denounced the ruling as politically motivated and vowed to challenge it in court, the Moldpress news agency reported.

Authorities suspect that Greater Moldova was effectively continuing the activities of the previously outlawed party of Ilan Shor, the fugitive businessman living in Moscow who has been accused of corruption but denies any wrongdoing.

Wider context

Sunday’s parliamentary vote is widely viewed as a watershed moment for the former Soviet republic, which is also a candidate for EU membership.

Since 2021, the ruling pro-European Party of Action and Solidarity (PAS), led by President Maia Sandu, has commanded a parliamentary majority.

However, recent opinion polls suggest the PAS could lose ground as opposition parties tap into public frustration over high living costs, rising poverty, and economic stagnation.

Analysts warn that a weakened PAS may be forced into coalition rule, potentially complicating its target of securing EU accession by 2030.

The exclusion of Greater Moldova comes just a week after another pro-Russian faction, Heart of Moldova, part of the Patriotic Bloc, was also banned from participating in the vote.

Moscow, for its part, maintains it does not interfere in Moldova’s internal affairs.

September 27, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

Moldovan opposition warns of election fraud

RT | September 25, 2025

Moldova’s pro-Western authorities will attempt to falsify the results of this weekend’s parliamentary election, including by ballot stuffing abroad, an opposition leader has claimed.

Irina Vlah of the Patriotic Electoral Bloc (BEP) urged citizens to participate in Sunday’s vote and claimed that fraud is the only way the governing Party of Action and Solidarity (PAS) can secure victory.

“They will try to appropriate all the unused ballots. They are preparing ballot-stuffing abroad under the cover of the ‘diaspora,’” she told supporters on Thursday.

Recent polls show PAS, the pro-Western party led by President Maia Sandu, trailing narrowly behind BEP. According to various media reports, Sandu secured re-election in 2024 thanks largely to ballots cast abroad, a fact that fuels opposition suspicions ahead of Sunday’s vote.

The Russian Foreign Ministry has accused the Moldovan authorities of a selective approach toward overseas voters. In a statement on Thursday, it noted that while 280 polling stations will be open in the US and Western Europe, with mail-in voting also permitted, only two stations will operate in Russia for its large Moldovan community, allowing just 10,000 people to cast ballots.

The ministry also dismissed what it described as the “spread of unfounded claims about Moscow’s interference” in Moldova’s internal affairs, pointing instead to the EU leaders openly supporting the country’s current leadership. In August, French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, and Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk traveled to Chisinau for Independence Day celebrations, as a show of support for the country’s EU path.

Sandu has accused Russia of waging a “hybrid war” and spending “hundreds of millions of euros” to sway Moldovan voters. Earlier this week, Moldovan police arrested 74 people on suspicion of plotting unrest, alleging a network of activists was working to amplify Russian influence.

Moscow has denied any involvement and warned on Tuesday that NATO members had already deployed troops in western Ukraine to prepare for an intervention in Moldova after the vote.

September 26, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , | Leave a comment

Moldova bans opposition party days before key vote

RT | September 26, 2025

Moldova’s Central Election Commission has banned an opposition party from taking part in this weekend’s parliamentary elections, local media reported Friday.

The government in Chisinau has a history of going after its political opponents under the banner of countering “Russian influence.”

A day earlier, a court backed the government’s request to suspend the Heart of Moldova party, which it accused of electoral manipulation. The targeted party’s president, Irina Vlah, has accused the government of using “lawfare” as part of a broader crackdown on political opponents.

The elimination hurts the ballot prospects of the Patriotic Electoral Bloc, a coalition of several parties that Vlah co-founded in a bid to remove the ruling Action and Solidarity party of President Maia Sandu from power.

The CEC cited the court, adding that under the ruling, all candidates designated by Heart of Moldova will be removed from the race. It gave the Patriotic Bloc 24 hours to adjust its lists accordingly.

Sandu, a staunch pro-EU politician who often claims her opponents are Russian agents backed by organized crime, has described the Sunday elections as a make-or-break moment for Moldova. Moscow has dismissed her claims that it was secretly funding challengers to her party’s parliamentary majority as “ridiculous.”

Last October, Sandu won a new term as president in what critics have described as a flawed election, in which the votes of Moldovans living in the European Union nations secured her victory.

Moscow accused Chisinau of denying thousands of Moldovan citizens living in Russia access to the ballot box by seriously restricting the number of polling stations.

Irina Vlah served as the governor of Gagauzia from 2015 to 2023 and as a member of the Moldovan parliament from 2005 to 2015. Her successor as governor of the ethnic Russian and Turkic region, Evgenia Gutsul, was sentenced to seven years in prison in August on money laundering charges she denies. Like Vlah, Gutsul has also been subjected to EU-backed international sanctions.

September 26, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Russophobia | | Leave a comment

Digital ID UK: Starmer’s Expanding Surveillance State

By Christina Maas | Reclaim The Net | September 26, 2025

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer came into office promising competence and calm after years of alleged political chaos.

What has followed is a government that treats civil liberties as disposable.

Under his watch, police have leaned on broad public order powers to detain people over “offensive” tweets.

Critics argue that what counts as “offensive” now changes depending on the political mood, which means ordinary citizens find themselves guessing at what might trigger a knock on the door.

This is happening while mass facial recognition cameras are being installed in public places.

The pattern is clear: expand surveillance, narrow dissent, and then assure the public it is all in the name of safety and order.

Against that backdrop, a digital ID system looks less like modernization and more like the missing piece in an expanding control grid.

Once every adult is forced to plug into a centralized identity wallet to work, rent, or access services, the state’s ability to monitor and sanction becomes unprecedented.

Starmer’s Labour government is dusting off one of its oldest obsessions: the dream of tagging every citizen like a parcel at the post office.

The latest revival comes in the form of a proposal to create mandatory digital ID cards, already nicknamed the “Brit Card,” for every working adult in the country.

The sales pitch sounds noble enough: crack down on illegal work, cut fraud, plug loopholes. The real effect would be to make ordinary life a permanent identity check.

Officials want job applications, rental agreements, and other basic transactions to be filtered through a government database, accessed through an app.

This, the people are told, will finally stop the shadow economy of dodgy employers. If that logic sounds familiar, it is because it is the same rationale Labour used for its last ID card scheme in the 2000s, a project that ended up in the political landfill in 2010 after enough voters realized what was happening.

“Digital ID is an enormous opportunity for the UK. It will make it tougher to work illegally in this country, making our borders more secure,” Starmer said in his announcement. “And it will also offer ordinary citizens countless benefits, like being able to prove your identity to access key services swiftly – rather than hunting around for an old utility bill.”

Campaigners and data rights groups are not buying the rebrand.

For Liberty’s Gracie Bradley cut straight to the point: the new version “is likely to be even more intrusive, insecure and discriminatory” than the one the country already threw out a decade ago.

That does not bode well for a government trying to convince citizens this time will be different.

Rebecca Vincent of Big Brother Watch spelled out where this all leads: “While Downing Street is scrambling to be seen as doing something about illegal immigration, we are sleepwalking into a dystopian nightmare where the entire population will be forced through myriad digital checkpoints to go about our everyday lives.”

Her warning does not require much imagination. Britain has a spotty track record on protecting sensitive data.

A poll commissioned by Big Brother Watch found that nearly two-thirds of the public already think the government cannot be trusted to protect their data. That is before any giant centralized ID system is rolled out.

Privacy advocates see this as a recipe for disaster, arguing that hackers and snooping officials alike will treat the system as a buffet of personal information.

Former Cabinet Minister David Davis, one of the longest-serving critics of ID schemes, described the risks as existential. “The systems involved are profoundly dangerous to the privacy and fundamental freedoms of the British people,” he said, noting the government has not explained how or if it would compensate citizens after the inevitable breach.

Silkie Carlo, the director of Big Brother Watch, issued a blunt forecast of where the “Brit Card” could lead.

She warned it could extend across public services, “creating a domestic mass surveillance infrastructure that will likely sprawl from citizenship to benefits, tax, health, possibly even internet data and more.”

In other words, once the pipes are laid, the water does not stop at employment checks.

Labour, of course, has been here before. The last time it rolled out ID cards, in 2009, the experiment barely survived a year before being junked by the incoming Conservative-led coalition as an “erosion of civil liberties.”

Labour is leaning heavily on polling that allegedly suggests up to 80 percent of the public backs digital right-to-work credentials.

Starmer himself recently adopted that framing. Earlier this month, he claimed digital IDs could “play an important part” in tackling black market employment.

He is pushing the case again at the Global Progress Action Summit in London, noting that “we all carry a lot more digital ID now than we did 20 years ago.”

What complicates the sales pitch is Labour’s own history of skepticism. Both Keir Starmer and Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper previously raised concerns about ID systems and their potential for government overreach.

That past caution has not stopped the new Home Secretary, Shabana Mahmood, from becoming one of the loudest champions of the plan. She recently declared the system “essential” for enforcing migration and employment laws.

Labour-aligned think tanks are also providing cover. Labour Together released a report describing digital ID as a “new piece of civic infrastructure,” with the potential to become a routine part of life.

***

Tony Blair has reemerged as a central architect of Britain’s dystopian digital future.

Through his think tank, the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change, the former Prime Minister is pushing the nationwide digital ID system, pitching it as the backbone of a tech-enabled state.

With Keir Starmer now in office, Blair’s vision is no longer an abstract policy paper. It is edging into reality with a new host.

For Blair, digital ID is not about convenience. It is about rewriting how government functions and can be what he calls a “weapon against populism.”

He has argued that a leaner, cheaper, more automated state is possible if citizens are willing to give up parts of their privacy. “My view is that people are actually prepared to trade quite a lot,” he once said, suggesting that resistance will dissolve once faster services are dangled in front of the public.

This project is not limited to streamlining bureaucracy. His version of efficiency is a frictionless state that also monitors, verifies, and restricts in ways that would have been inconceivable before the digital era.

With Starmer’s government now developing a digital ID wallet and considering a national rollout, Blair’s agenda is closer to official policy than ever. Marketed as modernization, the plan points toward a permanent restructuring of the relationship between citizen and state, locking personal identity into a centralized system that future governments will be able to expand at will.

September 26, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

‘Digital Chokehold’: Tool Developed by Tech Giants to Stop Terrorists Enables Mass Surveillance, Censorship

The Defender | September 24, 2025

Most people have no idea how far-reaching modern digital surveillance has become. In the wake of the Epstein scandal and the rise of the Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force Program, the public has largely accepted new monitoring tools as necessary to fight crimes against society’s most vulnerable.

That acceptance has allowed governments and Big Tech to quietly deploy one of the largest surveillance infrastructures in human history — an invisible, always-on monitoring system that watches nearly everything we send, store and share online.

PhotoDNA: Trojan horse for scanning everything 

At the heart of this infrastructure is PhotoDNA. Developed by Microsoft in 2009, PhotoDNA generates a digital fingerprint, or hash, for every image or video uploaded to participating platforms, which include Google, Meta, Apple, Dropbox, Twitter, Discord and many more.

These hashes are compared against a shared global database of known child sexual abuse material. If a match is found, the platform automatically flags, quarantines or reports the file.

The database is continuously updated and instantly synchronized across all partners, allowing near real-time takedowns.

This was sold to the public as a tool exclusively for catching predators. But the technology itself can’t discern the difference between illegal images and political speech. And over time, the scope of its use has quietly expanded.

From predators to ‘extremists’: enter GIFCT 

In 2017, tech giants — Meta, Microsoft, YouTube and Twitter (now X) — founded the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT). Publicly, its mission was noble: stop terrorists from using digital platforms to recruit, organize or spread propaganda.

Privately, however, GIFCT built something far more powerful — a centralized global database of “objectionable content” — modeled after PhotoDNA but repurposed for ideological policing.

Here’s how GIFCT works:

  • When one partner flags content as “extremist” or “terrorist,” GIFCT generates a hash, a string of characters used to create a unique digital fingerprint for data (a file, photo or data) that can’t be decoded. A hash is obtained by running a mathematical formula over the data.
  • That hash is instantly shared across all member platforms.
  • Any matching content is blocked, throttled or erased in real time — often without informing the user.
  • The flagged account may also be shadow-banned (hidden without the user’s knowledge), suspended or referred to law enforcement.

The system’s integration across multiple companies and platforms effectively bypasses borders, legal jurisdictions and constitutional protections. Once content enters the GIFCT database, it can vanish from the internet everywhere at once.

The silent redefining of ‘extremism’ 

GIFCT’s power becomes more troubling when we examine how “extremism” is defined.

In 2021, internal GIFCT documents revealed discussions about expanding its hash database beyond terrorism to include:

“Fringe groups [whose] non-violent ideologies … are on the periphery of social movements or larger organizations, with more extreme views than those of the majority.”  (“Broadening the GIFCT Hash-Sharing Database Taxonomy,” p.53)

This is a turning point. It moves GIFCT from targeting violent threats to monitoring dissenting ideas.

Civil rights groups, health freedom advocates, independent journalists, whistleblowers and reformers — anyone operating outside mainstream consensus — could now be flagged, throttled or silenced under GIFCT’s framework.

And because private companies make these decisions in closed-door sessions, there is:

  • No public oversight.
  • No appeal process.
  • No democratic accountability.

The mechanisms of invisible control 

GIFCT’s technology operates quietly in the background, shaping information flows without most users realizing it:

  • Shadow banning: content gets published but algorithmically suppressed, so almost no one sees it.
  • Real-Time erasure: posts or videos vanish instantly across multiple platforms if hashed.
  • Behavioral profiling: data about what you read, share and discuss can be tied to “risk profiles.”
  • Proactive takedowns: artificial intelligence, or AI, now predicts “likely extremist content” before it’s even posted. What began as a fight against terrorism has evolved into an unprecedented capability for narrative control — one where Big Tech and government-backed nongovernmental organizations quietly manage what the world can see, share and believe.

The threat to civil rights and social reform 

Surveillance networks like GIFCT don’t just monitor — they shape activism itself. By algorithmically suppressing controversial, dissenting or reformist voices, these systems can:

  • Preemptively neutralize protest movements before they organize.
  • Silence journalists who challenge entrenched power.
  • Marginalize minority political perspectives.
  • Narrow public debate until only approved narratives remain visible.

This has profound consequences for democracy and civil liberties. History shows us that nearly every major social reform — civil rights, women’s suffrage, LGBTQ rights, antiwar movements — began as fringe positions.

If today’s automated surveillance systems had existed decades ago, many transformative reforms might never have gained visibility.

Without transparency and democratic oversight, GIFCT risks creating a digital chokehold on cultural evolution itself.

What must be done 

To preserve free speech, open debate and the possibility of reform:

  • Congress must act to place limits on GIFCT’s scope and require full public transparency.
  • Privacy and civil rights organizations must be empowered to audit GIFCT’s hash lists and review what’s being censored.
  • Users must have due process rights — the ability to appeal labels, removals and bans.
  • Citizens deserve public reporting on who decides what gets suppressed and why.

A choice between freedom and control 

The question is no longer whether you have “something to hide” but “who gets to decide what is hidden?”

What began as a narrowly focused child protection tool has grown into a globally integrated surveillance apparatus capable of monitoring nearly all speech, thought and dissent online.

If we fail to act, GIFCT and its partners will continue to quietly rewrite the boundaries of acceptable discourse — undermining civil rights movements, weakening reform efforts, and placing democratic freedoms in the hands of unelected private boards.

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

September 25, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | | Leave a comment

German election turns into farce after AfD candidate banned from local race, only 29% of voters participate

Remix News | September 22, 2025

Germany’s left have long claimed that the Alternative for Germany (AfD) is a threat to democracy, and due to this claim, they argue the party should be banned entirely. Although banning parties is typically reserved for authoritarian regimes, this outcome remains a very real possibility in Germany, and a local election in the city of Ludwigshafen just showed what such an outcome could look like in practice.

Incredibly, the main candidate for the AfD, Joachim Paul, was banned from running in the mayoral election. The method used to ban him could become widespread and now represent — despite what the left claims — the true threat to democracy in Germany.

Using an expert opinion from the powerful domestic spy agency, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV), commissioned by Social Democrat (SPD)-led Interior Minister of Rhineland-Palantinate, Paul was banned through the courts. It was a backdoor method that three separate courts upheld after numerous appeals by the AfD’s lawyers.

“Election night without the blue bar. And without an alternative! Remarkable: low voter turnout and a relatively high number of invalid votes. I thank everyone who has supported me in the last 6 weeks! Many heartfelt thanks!” wrote Paul on his X page.

Notably, Paul was leading in the polls before he was removed entirely from the ballot. Nobody replaced him on the ballot either, meaning the AfD was not represented by anyone in the election.

Now, the turnout in the mayoral election has reached an all-time low of just 29.3 percent. In 2017’s mayoral election in Ludwigshafen, the then-SPD candidate Jutta Steinruck won with 60.2 percent participation.

That means voter turnout was cut in half from that election.

That is not all. For those who did vote, many of them appear to have submitted “spoiled” ballots. A record-high number of ballots were ruled invalid, at 9.2 percent. Eight years ago, that number was just 2.6 percent.

In the final totals for this most recent election, in which Paul was banned, Klaus Blettner (CDU) and Jens Peter Gotter (SPD) have advanced to the runoff vote. Blettner received 41.2 percent of the vote and Goter 35.5 percent. Another SPD candidate, Martin Wegner, received 15.7 percent, and Volt candidate Michaela Schneider-Wettstein received 7.6 percent.

However, to claim that whoever wins the second round of voting now has a “mandate” from the people in a fair democratic election is questionable, if not outright laughable.

Still, the liberal media and establishment politicians will either be silent about what happened in Ludwigshafen or openly cheer it on, despite 70 percent of voters choosing simply not to vote, and many who did protested with invalid votes.

This entire operation, a true victory for “democracy,” was orchestrated by AfD rival parties from start to finish. Outgoing Mayor Steinruck, while serving as chairwoman of the electoral committee, initiated the expulsion. All parties in the city are represented on the electoral committee — except the AfD.

The only party to reject the move in the committee was the Free Democrats (FDP). All others backed the unprecedented move. It was in their electoral interest, after all. Eliminating the democratic competition through bureaucratic backroom deals is now de facto a reality in Germany.

Paul says he is not giving up and told the media that he has initiated further legal action, the very same day voters headed to the polls.

“We are determined to contest the election. Whether after the first round or after the runoff is up to my lawyers,” Paul told the German Press Agency.

Other courts had already rejected Paul’s attempts to gain a spot on the ballot before the election, with all of these courts telling him he must pursue legal actions after the vote was already concluded.

Party co-leader Alice Weidel has criticized the mayoral race as well.

“Only 29.3% of the Ludwigshafen residents participated in the mayoral election, from which AfD candidate Joachim Paul was excluded. A democracy thrives on the freedom of choice — but that wasn’t even granted to the citizens,” wrote Weidel.

However, her and her party’s protests are certain to have little influence on how this new weapon is used. In fact, the only remedy may be through the courts, the same ones that have many judges actively hostile to the AfD.

In contrast, the outgoing mayor, Steinruck, says banning a candidate through a bureaucratic process, one that has never been used before, is simply the “rule of law.”

“There are rules. We, as the electoral committee, have obviously adhered to these rules. There are now three court rulings that confirm this.” She said the fact that people are “questioning” the rule of law makes her “sad.”

“We all have to continue working on this in the future,” Steinruck added.

AfD remains at record high

This move comes at a time when debate over a ban on the entire AfD continues to rage. The AfD currently stands at between 26 percent and 27 percent in national polls, and could even reach 30 percent within the next year.

Of course, the party may also fall from this polling high. However, the federal government remains deeply unpopular, and the core issues of a faltering economy, sky-high immigration, exploding crime, troubled schools, soaring debt levels, and a disastrous energy policy are not going away.

The ground is ripe for the AfD to remain a competitive party.

Pressure for an outright ban will grow more intense as the party grows more popular, but if that is not achieved, more and more AfD candidates may simply be eliminated from participating in elections altogether via the method used to eliminate Paul.

The precedent has now been set.

September 23, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties | | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »