Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

2025 Looks Bleak For Germany… Energy The Most Expensive In Europe … Growing Speech Tyranny

2025 in Germany will be a year of more energy inflation and loss of free speech rights

By P Gosselin | No Tricks Zone | January 1, 2025

Effective today, Germany’s CO2 surcharge will rise from 45 euros a tonne to 55 euros, which will further fan inflation and social discontent.

Already Germany’s electricity prices are among the highest in the world, and the most expensive in Europe:

Chart: strom-report.com/ 

Germany clamps down on dissenters, free speech

2025 will not be an easy year for dissenters and critics of the government, as this is increasingly being criminalized in Germany thanks to recently passed laws and acts that aim to suppress free speech in Germany.

The former head Germany’s Constitution Protection Authority (Bundesverfassungsschutz), Thomas Haldenwang (CDU Party), suggested last February when presenting measures to fight right-wing extremism, that human thoughts and speech patterns need to be under surveillance and become the business of the government: “It’s also about shifting verbal and mental boundaries. We have to be careful that thought and language patterns don’t become embedded in our language.”

Mocking the state now verboten

Haldenwang’s boss, Federal Minister of the Interior Nancy Faeser (SPD Party), wants to treat vocal conservative protesters in the same way as organized crime groups: “Those who mock the state must deal with a strong state.”

“We want to take account of the fact that hate on the internet also occurs below the threshold of criminal liability,”said Federal Minister for Family Affairs Lisa Paus (Greens) at her press conference on February 13 on the topic of ‘Hate on the Internet’.“Many enemies of democracy know exactly what falls under freedom of expression on social media platforms,”

Meant by “enemies of democracy” here are opposition forces, even when democratically elected.

Unwanted election results may be annulled

In response to comments in favor of the conservatives made by Elon Musk, German President Frank Walter Steinmeier hinted he would annul the results of the upcoming February 23 national elections if he doesn’t like the results.

So in Germany, it’s watch what you say and, if the old parties don’t like the election results, then they might just annul them. Germany is slipping back quickly to darker times.

January 1, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Economics, Full Spectrum Dominance, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity | | Leave a comment

A New Year’s Resolution: Let’s Get the United States Out of the Censorship Business

By Jonathan Turley | December 31, 2024

On this New Year’s Eve, billions of people will gather with friends to ring in 2025 with the hope of a better year to come.  For the first time in many years, free-speech advocates have a reason to celebrate.

With 2024, we will say goodbye to one of the most reviled offices in the Biden Administration: The Global Engagement Center. I discuss the Center in my recent book, The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage as one of the most active components in the massive censorship system funded by the Biden Administration. The demise of the GEC is a good start. However, like weight loss resolutions, it will take much more of a commitment if we are going to restore free speech in the United States. It is time to make the ultimate resolution to rip out the censorship root and stem from our government.

This month, the Biden Administration fought to keep the GEC funded, but Republicans refused to include it in the continuing resolution for the budget.  However, even with the closure of this one office, Biden will leave behind the most comprehensive censorship system in the history of the United States.

Over the last three years, many of us have detailed a comprehensive system of grants to academic and third party organizations to create blacklists or to pressure advertisers to withdraw support for targeted sites. The subjects for censorship ranged from election fraud to social justice to climate change.

testified at the first hearing by the special committee investigating the censorship system funded or coordinated by the Biden Administration. It is an unprecedented alliance of corporate, government, and academic groups against free speech in the United States. The Biden Administration established the most anti-free speech record since the Adams Administration.

House investigations showed the critical role played by government officials in “switchboarding,” or channeling demands for removal or bans in social media. Officials evaded the limits of the First Amendment by using these groups as surrogates for censorship.

Even with the elimination of the GEC, other offices remain in various agencies, including the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) in the Department of Homeland Security, which emerged as one of the critical control centers in this system.

CISA head Jen Easterly declared that her agency’s mandate over critical infrastructure would be extended to include “our cognitive infrastructure.” That includes not just “disinformation” and “misinformation,” but combating “malinformation” – described as information “based on fact, but used out of context to mislead, harm, or manipulate.”

These groups form a censorship consortium where the suppression of speech attracts millions in federal dollars. Election Integrity Partnership (EIP) was created in association with Stanford University “at the request of DHS/CISA.”

EIP supplied a “centralized reporting system” to process what were known as “Jira tickets” targeting unacceptable views. It would include not only politicians but commentators and pundits as well as the satirical site The Babylon Bee.

Stanford’s Virality Project pushed to censor even true facts since “true stories … could fuel hesitancy” over taking the vaccine or other measures. Emails show government officials stressing that they could not be seen as “openly endors[ing]” censorship while other groups sought to minimize public scrutiny of their work.

For example, one article featured the work of Kate Starbird, director and co-founder of the University of Washington Center for an Informed Public. In one communication, Starbird cautioned against giving examples of disinformation to keep them from being used by critics, adding “since everything is politicized and disinformation inherently political, every example is bait.”

Likewise, University of Michigan’s James Park is shown pitching that school’s WiseDex First Pitch program, promising that “our misinformation service helps policy makers at platforms who want to . . . push responsibility for difficult judgments to someone outside the company . . . by externalizing the difficult responsibility of censorship.”

The system has layers of interconnected grants and systems. For example, the EIP worked with the Global Engagement Center that contracted with the Atlantic Council in censorship efforts.

The censorship system included scoring groups through a grant from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) to the British-based Global Disinformation Index (GDI). The index targeted ten conservative and libertarian sites as the most dangerous sources of disinformation, including sites like Reason which publishes conservative legal analysis. Conversely, some of the most liberal sites were ranked as the most trustworthy for advertisers.

The system is still in place, but on December 23, 2024, the GEC closed its doors. That is something to celebrate but not something to take as great comfort. This is a redundant and overlapping system created precisely to allow for such attrition.

Years ago, some of us wrote about the creation of the infamous Disinformation Governance Board at Homeland Security under its so-called “Disinformation Nanny,” Nina Jankowicz. When the Biden administration caved to public outcry and disbanded the Board, many celebrated. However, as I previously testified, the Biden Administration never told the public about a far larger censorship effort in other agencies, including an estimated 80 FBI agents secretly targeting citizens and groups for disinformation.

The system has functioned like a multiheaded hydra where cutting off one head only allows two more to grow back. These censors will not simply walk away and become dentists or bartenders. They have a skill set for censorship and this is now a profitable industry supporting scores of people who now market themselves as “disinformation specialists.”

Shutting down the GEC will eliminate a $61 million budget and 120 employees. However, these employees will find ample opportunities not just in other agencies but in academia and state agencies. There are also pro-censorship sites like BlueSky, which are becoming safe spaces for liberals who do not want to be “triggered” by opposing views . (Notably, BlueSky hired a former Twitter employee who was fired after Musk cleaned out at what is now X).

They are not going anywhere unless the Trump Administration and the Congress makes free speech a priority in eliminating each of these funding sources.

As I wrote in the book, we need to get the United States out of the censorship business by passing a law barring any federal funds for the use of censorship, including grants to academic and NGO groups.

Rooting out this censorship system will require a comprehensive effort by the new Trump Administration. So here is a resolution that I hope many in the Trump Administration will share: let’s get the United States out of the censorship business in 2025.

January 1, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Leave a comment

Ukraine Violates Draft Rights, Restricts Religious Freedom, and Tortures PoWs – UN Report

Sputnik – 01.01.2025

Ukraine has been violating its own constitution by unduly restricting the right to conscientious objection to military service during mobilization, the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) said in a report published on Tuesday.

“The right to conscientious objection to military service has continued to be subjected to undue restrictions in law and practice … Domestic law in Ukraine unduly restricts this Constitutional right only to some forms of religion or belief, excluding others, contrary to applicable obligations of equality before the law and non-discrimination under the ICCPR,” the report said.

For example, five men faced arbitrary detention and torture in Ukraine for attempting to exercise their right to conscientious objection to military service, the UN rights watchdog said.

“During the reporting period, OHCHR documented the cases of five men who were assigned to military duty and transferred to a military training facility after attempting to exercise their right of conscientious objection to military service. In all cases, the men were arbitrarily detained between two to four days by military personnel responsible for conscription and subjected to ill-treatment or torture.” the report said.

Religious Freedom Under Attack

The UN report also found that Ukraine’s new legal provisions restricted religious freedoms by prohibiting the Russian Orthodox Church.

“In territory controlled by the Government of Ukraine, new legal provisions regarding religious organizations entered into force; these prohibit the activities of the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine, as well as Ukrainian religious organizations found to be affiliated with counterparts in the Russian Federation. The law introducing these provisions established disproportionate restrictions on the freedom to manifest one’s religion or belief,” the report read.

Torture of PoWs

Furthermore, almost all Russian PoWs in Ukraine interviewed by the UN from September to November 2024 were subjected to torture, the report said. Fourteen soldiers were subjected to sexual violence.

“During the reporting period, OHCHR interviewed 25 Russian POWs in Ukrainian internment facilities, including in the newly opened camp ‘Zakhid-4’ in Lviv [Lvov] city. All but one reported experiencing torture or ill-treatment in 2024 at one or several stages of captivity,” the OHCHR said.

The UN agency said it verified the killing by first-person-view drones of three Russian and one Ukrainian servicepersons who were “hors de combat” and severely wounded on the battlefield. It cited drone video footage that showed a heavily wounded, unarmed Russian serviceman being killed by a drone while lying on the ground.

January 1, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Militarism, Subjugation - Torture | , | Leave a comment

Two Senior South Korean Military Officials Indicted Over Martial Law — Reports

Sputnik – 31.12.2024

SEOUL – Two high-ranking South Korean military officials have been indicted over their role in the president’s failed attempt to impose martial law, the Yonhap news agency reported on Tuesday.

Capital Defense Commander Lee Jin-woo is suspected of sending troops to the National Assembly on December 3 and ordering the arrest of 14 people, including opposition party leaders, while Defense Counterintelligence Commander Yeo In-hyung is accused of ordering troops to the parliament and telling the police commissioner to dispatch officers to detain lawmakers.

The officers face accusations of inciting insurrection to overturn constitutional order, the prosecutors reportedly said.

The parliament voted 191-71 on Tuesday to launch a special committee investigation into President Yoon Suk Yeol’s martial law declaration to assess the legality of a cabinet meeting that was held shortly before the martial law was imposed, as well as the role of the military and police. The probe is expected to end by February 13, 2025.

On December 3, President Yoon declared martial law, claiming that the opposition was sympathizing with North Korea and plotting a “rebellion.” The parliament defied the presidential declaration and voted to lift martial law hours later. Yoon obeyed and apologized to the nation. On December 14, the South Korean parliament voted to impeach Yoon over his controversial declaration of martial law.

The Constitutional Court will make a final decision on the matter by June 11, 2025. Yoon will be suspended from office pending the ruling and will not be able to leave the country, while an interim president will be in charge until the final verdict is passed.

December 31, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties | | Leave a comment

After NATO’s Romanian Coup, Where Next?

By Kit Klarenberg | Global Delinquents | December 29, 2024

On December 6th, Romania’s constitutional court made an extraordinary decision to inexplicably overturn first round results of the country’s November 24th presidential election. Conveniently, the ruling was made mere days before a runoff that, according to polls, would’ve seen upstart outsider Calin Georgescu win via landslide. In the process, citizens of all NATO member states were provided with a particularly pitiless, real-time crash course on what could now happen in their own countries, should the ‘wrong’ candidates be elected fair and square.

Georgescu’s stunning victory in the first round caught Romania’s political elite and their Western sponsors off guard, while leaving him the most popular political figure in the country. Campaigning on a traditionalist, nationalist platform, he extolled views some might consider unsavoury, but also advocated nationalisation, and state investment in local industry. Perhaps predictably, the Western media has universally smeared him as “far-right”, “pro-Putin” and a “conspiracy theorist”, among other now-familiar sobriquets commonly levelled at political dissidents.

Georgescu’s greatest crime is to determinedly oppose continued Romanian involvement in and backing for the Ukraine proxy war. As Kiev’s Black Sea-facing neighbour, Bucharest has offered significant financial, material and political succour since February 2022, all along running the risk of getting caught in the crossfire. But in interviews with Western news outlets, Georgescu boldly proclaimed any and all “military or political support” would be reduced to “zero” under his watch:

“I have to take care of my people. I don’t want to involve my people… Everything stops. I have to take care just about my people. We have a lot of problems ourselves.”

No official reason has been given for Romania’s constitutional court voiding November’s vote, despite days earlier signing off on the results. Nonetheless, in the intervening time, Bucharest’s security apparatus released declassified reports intimating – without making direct accusations or providing any evidence whatsoever – Georgescu’s victory may have resulted from a wide-ranging, Moscow-sponsored influence campaign, delivered via TikTok. Details provided instead pointed to a rather mundane – albeit successful – social media marketing effort.

The plot further thickened in late December, when it was revealed the TikTok campaign that purportedly boosted Georgescu was in fact financed by Romania’s National Liberal party. This backing helped propel the hitherto obscure candidate to national prominence, the objective potentially being to harm the National Liberal party’s arch nemesis Social Democrats. No evidence of Muscovite funding, let alone support, for Georgescu has ever emerged. Nonetheless, despite these disclosures, the narrative of Russian destabilisation catapulting him into power has since been invincibly minted.

NATO’s grand and ever-expanding military base in Romania

Bucharest’s sprawling territory is home to multiple US missile facilities, and a giant NATO military base, scheduled to soon be greatly expanded, explicitly in service of decisively changing the region’s “balance of power” in the West’s favour. Meanwhile, Romanian presidents wield significant clout in domestic and international affairs. They dictate foreign policy, serve as commander-in-chief of the armed forces, and appoint prime ministers. All of which points to a far more likely rationale for the presidential election’s abrogation than “Russian meddling”.

‘Without Hope’

On December 10th, the BBC published a striking report on how Romanians were “stunned by the eleventh-hour cancellation of their presidential election.” The British state broadcaster was at pains throughout to justify the vote’s unprecedented, despotic annulment as proper, reasonably motivated by a “massive” and “aggressive” malign meddling campaign on TikTok – whether of Russian origin or not – improperly skewing the result. However, the BBC evidently had little choice but to admit Georgescu was enormously, and organically, popular.

For example, NATO veteran Mircea Geoana, Bucharest’s former foreign affairs minister who ran for president in November and finished sixth, was quoted as saying “Romania dodged a bullet” and “came very close” to an all-out coup. “If Moscow can do this in Romania, which is profoundly anti-Russian, it means they can do it anywhere,” he ominously cautioned. Still, Geoana conceded there was “a whole cocktail of grievances in our society,” and it would be “hugely mistaken to believe” Georgescu’s success “was just because of Russia.”

The BBC acknowledged immense “fatigue” with Romania’s doggedly pro-Western political establishment widely abounds among the local population, who harbour an ever-growing number of completely legitimate grievances, entirely unaddressed in the mainstream. By contrast, the British state broadcaster recorded, Georgescu not only spoke openly and passionately about these manifold problems, but offered tangible solutions for tackling them. And a great many average citizens “liked what he said.” Several Georgescu supporters were duly quoted in the article, issuing effusive praise. One evangelised:

“He’s like a preacher, with a Bible in his hand, and I thought he spoke only the truth… He talks about rights and dignity. Romanians go to other countries for work, but we have so many resources here. Wood, grain – and our soil is very rich. Why should we be vagrants in Italy?”

The BBC further noted Georgescu’s “pledge to Make Romania Great Again helped him perform particularly strongly among the vast Romanian diaspora.” Given Bucharest’s mass depopulation in recent years, significantly assisted by EU membership, this is hardly surprising. “Many who left because life was so tough are now getting by abroad rather than prospering,” the British state broadcaster observed. Meanwhile, in Bucharest, costs of basic goods are “climbing at the fastest rate in Europe.” An expat supporter of Georgescu forcefully declared:

“He’s corrupt? He’s with Putin? No, he’s not. He’s with the people. With Romania. Georgescu is a patriot. He wants peace, not war, and we want that too. Someone wants something good for his country and they won’t allow him to do that… Maybe he’ll be in prison in months and for what? For nothing… We feel lost right now, without hope.”

‘Allied Solidarity’

To date, no concrete evidence directly implicating NATO powers in the invalidation of Romania’s presidential election has emerged. We do not – and may never – know what might have been said behind closed doors to members of Bucharest’s Western-bought political, judicial, security and military establishment, and by whom. But there is a clear precedent for such backroom conniving. In the final months of 1989, Communism across the Warsaw Pact, the Cold War-era constellation of Central and Eastern European Soviet satellite states.

The sole exception was Romania, then led by Nicolae Ceausescu. On December 4th that year, he privately met with then-Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, to discuss the fall of longstanding Communist governments in Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Hungary and Poland. Gorbachev, to all intents and purposes a Western puppet, assured Ceausescu his position was secure, he would “survive”, and they would meet again in mere weeks. That summit never came to pass though, as on December 25th, Ceausescu was executed by military firing squad.

The 1989 Romanian revolution

This followed violent mass protests across Romania. Years later, it was revealed high-ranking US officials secretly met with Gorbachev that month, imploring him to deploy the Red Army to oust Ceausescu. These entreaties were apparently rebuffed. Yet, subsequent research indicates that throughout December 1989, a profusion of KGB operatives were conducting uncertain, covert missions across the country, in coordination with Ion Iliescu, who succeeded Ceausescu. Suspicions he personally ordered the very security service crackdowns that ignited the insurrectionary anti-Ceausescu demonstrations endure to this day.

Whatever the truth of the matter, Romania’s outsized geopolitical importance to the Empire then and now couldn’t be clearer. In the weeks since Georgescu’s victory was vetoed, it has been announced that further scores of foreign NATO troops will be dispatched to Bucharest, in explicit response to “the evolution of the security situation in the Black Sea region.” Meanwhile, Romanian officials talk a big game on “allied solidarity”, and look forward to “extensive joint training exercises” over the year ahead.

Furthermore, on December 12th, the Romanian government abruptly greenlit long-mooted, highly controversial legislation providing for the country’s military and all its “weapons, military devices and ammunition” to come under total foreign control and direction at any time, without a formal state declaration of emergency, siege, or war. In other words, NATO would have unilateral power to commandeer Bucharest’s armed forces, at its behest. A useful capability indeed, as the nearby Ukraine proxy war careens towards total collapse, and overt foreign involvement is openly mulled.

The aforementioned BBC article reported that local “suspicion” about whether unseen foreign forces may have swayed “the judges’ ruling to cancel the vote” is such, “even those who feared a president Georgescu – and believe Russia was backing him – now worry about the precedent just set for Romanian democracy.” We are left to ponder where next an illiberal coup of the kind that just went down in Bucharest might be replicated, as the Empire’s surging contempt for democracy and public will becomes writ ever-larger.

Nonetheless, one might draw some solace from the fact that even those who endorsed Romania’s autocratic putsch are well-aware it was a blunt-force, short-term solution to a panoply of deeply complex, likely intractable socioeconomic and political problems. Former NATO high-ranker Mircea Geoana told the British state broadcaster that nullification of Georgescu’s victory had delivered at best transitory reprieve to Western powers, and their chosen puppets in Romania. Moreover, he feared the move could spectacularly boomerang, should elites continue to ignore citizens’ concerns:

“We bought ourselves some time. But there is real fury here. And if we don’t do something, we might have a repeat.”

December 29, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

The Vindication of William Bay

Health Advisory & Recovery Team | December 27, 2024

Australia was one of the most authoritarian countries in the world from 2020 onward. This week, however, we can celebrate a victory that reflects what Australians used to epitomize – no-nonsense courage and jovial determination.

The story begins in 2018, when Dr. William Bay foresaw the dangers of the Medical Board seeking to regulate doctors’ speech.

Dr. Bay stood firm against COVID restrictions, vaccine mandates, and the limiting of treatment options. But it was in 2022 that he caused quite the stir. At an Australian Medical Association (AMA) Conference he interrupted a lecture, calling out the attending doctors for their silence on vaccine harms. It was a scene to remember: doctors, masked and seated at round white tables, began standing up one by one, walking out in quiet protest. Dr. Bay was then escorted out by security. When asked how he managed to get in, his response was simply: “I’m a doctor!” The footage of his exit remains iconic and worth watching.

As seems to be the theme with dissenters, Dr. Bay was reported anonymously to the regulator. The complaint had nothing to do with his conduct as a doctor – in fact, he had an unblemished professional record. Yet, the Medical Board of Australia, under the supervision of the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA), suspended him.

Dr. Bay’s case highlights systemic failures within AHPRA and the Medical Board, particularly around free speech, informed consent, and medical autonomy. Under AHPRA’s 2021 position statement, health practitioners were pressured to align strictly with public health messaging, risking regulatory action if they shared views—on or off social media—that contradicted official vaccine campaigns. This created a chilling effect, stifling doctors’ professional independence and undermining their ability to provide balanced information, a cornerstone of free and informed consent for patients. Compounding this issue, AHPRA strongly encouraged — some would say coerced — doctors themselves to be vaccinated, eroding their personal autonomy to make medical decisions. In their overreach, AHPRA not only failed to respect informed consent but also demonstrated a lack of understanding of their own regulations, which are designed to safeguard patient choice and professional integrity. Dr. Bay’s courageous stand not only challenged these failures but reaffirmed the importance of free speech, informed consent, and ethical medical practice in patient care.

In June 2023, he lost his case in the High Court and was ordered to pay costs to AHPRA. Despite these setbacks, Dr. Bay – representing himself throughout – refused to give up.

His story then took a remarkable turn. As a Christian, Dr. Bay recounts a pivotal moment when he felt God instruct him to draft an amended application focusing on procedural fairness and bias and keep it ready, even though it seemed unnecessary at the time. On the final day of the appeal, the judge remarked that Bay had made excellent points on procedural issues but noted they weren’t in his original application. When Dr. Bay asked if he could submit an amendment, the judge agreed – on the condition that it be completed over the lunch break. No problem there – Bay delivered.

The case revealed a significant breach of fairness. Dr. Anne Tonkin, then Chair of the Medical Board of Australia, was present at the Australian Medical Association (AMA) National Conference where Dr. William Bay interrupted proceedings to voice his criticisms. During this event, Dr. Tonkin discussed the possibility of filing a complaint with Associate Professor Julian Rait, the AMA Chair at the time. Subsequently, Associate Professor Rait submitted a complaint regarding Dr. Bay’s conduct. Dr. Tonkin later chaired the Medical Board meeting that decided to suspend Dr. Bay’s medical registration.

On December 13, 2024, the Brisbane Supreme Court overturned the suspension, backdating the decision to when it originally occurred. Justice Thomas Bradley ruled that AHPRA and the Medical Board acted with bias and failed to afford Dr. Bay procedural fairness. The judge went further, condemning the regulators for their “animus” and “combative approach” toward Dr. Bay, noting their inability to prove that he had breached any laws or guidelines.

As a result, Dr. Bay’s suspension was lifted, and he was reinstated with costs awarded against AHPRA and the Medical Board. Notably, Bay’s costs were minimal – he had represented himself.

Now free to speak, he is continuing to voice his concerns in the style of a true Aussie lad, “I think the vaccines are shit, mate. They’re absolute shit.”

Dr. Bay’s triumph is not just personal; it sets a powerful precedent for doctors across Australia, and, we can hope, beyond. This ruling safeguards their right to speak freely, prioritize patient welfare, and challenge overreaching authorities without fear of retribution.

In the spirit of the “Aussie lad,” Dr. William Bay has shown what courage, conviction, and persistence can achieve – a victory for truth, justice, and freedom.

December 28, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

New York Governor Hochul Signs Controversial Online Safety Bill, Renewing Free Speech Concerns

By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | December 28, 2024

A controversial legislative package signed by New York Governor Kathy Hochul is likely to once again ignite concerns over free speech; as critics argue – just like the last time she tried to enact such legislation – it promotes censorship under the guise of online safety. Among the measures is S895B/A6789B, a bill mandating social media companies disclose their terms of service regarding so-called “hate speech” and submit detailed reports to the state attorney general.

We obtained a copy of the bill for you here.

In a press release, Hochul’s office borrowed a turn from the pro-censorship UK government and touted the legislation as a step toward “Online Safety,” but many see it as a tool for stifling expression. The term “hate speech,” often deployed in ambiguous and subjective ways, has frequently been used to suppress dissenting opinions. This bill empowers both government entities and social media giants to arbitrarily regulate speech.

Assemblymember Grace Lee (D-District 65), a vocal proponent of the legislation, justified the measures by citing the spread of information during the COVID-19 pandemic. She argued that “hate and disinformation” were spreading like “wildfire,” necessitating stricter controls.

Lee further criticized Big Tech for failing to adequately police content, stating, “These companies have a responsibility to protect users from this hate, but have failed to do so.”

Similarly, NY State Senator Brad Hoylman-Sigal (D-District 47) framed his support for the bill in language emphasizing identity-based violence and discrimination. Hoylman-Sigal asserted that social media companies must act to prevent the spread of “disinformation and hate-fueled violence.”

He even pointed to the events of January 6, 2021, as evidence of the alleged dangers posed by unmoderated online speech, suggesting these platforms bear responsibility for addressing such issues.

Opponents of the legislation view these arguments as a pretext for imposing sweeping censorship measures. They argue that handing more control over speech to government officials and powerful corporations undermines fundamental freedoms.

Critics of this latest measure draw parallels to an earlier law championed by Hochul that was blocked by a federal court. The law, enacted last summer, sought to regulate “hateful conduct” online by requiring social media platforms to implement mechanisms for reporting content deemed “hateful.”

The broad definition of “hateful conduct,” which included content that could “vilify, humiliate, or incite violence” based on various identity categories, raised alarm among free speech advocates.

The legislation faced a legal challenge from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), free speech platform Rumble, and First Amendment scholar Eugene Volokh. Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. of the Southern District of New York struck down the law, citing its chilling effect on constitutionally protected speech.

“The First Amendment protects from state regulation speech that may be deemed ‘hateful,’ and generally disfavors regulation of speech based on its content unless it is narrowly tailored to serve a compelling governmental interest,” the court ruled. It further emphasized that the law compelled social media networks to adopt speech policies aligned with the state’s definitions, violating their editorial discretion and the First Amendment.

December 28, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Telegram blocking Russian media in EU

RT | December 28, 2024

The Telegram channels of multiple major Russian news outlets were rendered inaccessible across the EU on Sunday. The affected channels now display a plaque stating that access to them has been restricted over alleged “violation of local laws,” with all the content unavailable.

According to media reports, the affected channels include such Russian majors as RIA Novosti, Izvestia, Rossiya 1, Channel One, NTV and Rossiyskaya Gazeta. While it was not immediately clear whether the bans are EU-wide, the restrictions have been reportedly rolled out in Poland, Belgium, France, the Netherlands, Greece, Italy and the Czech Republic.

The EU has taken multiple hostile steps against Russian media amid the ongoing conflict between Moscow and Kiev – and even before it. Some of the media affected in the apparent Telegram ban, namely Rossiyskaya Gazeta, Izvestia and RIA Novosti, were slapped with a broadcasting ban in the bloc in May. At the time, the EU Council claimed the outlets were under the “permanent direct or indirect control” of the Russian leadership, and played an “essential and instrumental” role in the hostilities.

No official statements have so far been made on the matter, either by Telegram, the EU as a whole or by individual members of the bloc.

December 28, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

How Speaking Out Against Harmful COVID Policies Can Get You Banned by the NHS

The story of a bizarre punishment

By MJ Sutherland | Health Advisory & Recovery Team | December 27, 2024

It’s been an incredible journey.

At the end of July 2021, I walked out of a well-paid job with Dumfries & Galloway Council. I resigned in protest—against fraudulent COVID testing, child maltreatment through misuse of tests and enforcement of mask mandates, and the complete disregard for their lack of authority to do any of it. What they were doing to Other People’s Children in schools was indefensible, and I wasn’t going to stay silent. Later I forced them to admit, via the Scottish Information Commissioner, that they had no legal authority for any of it. I’d long since left the council by this time.

At first, the threats were thinly veiled: hints that speaking out could jeopardise my job, suggestions that I should “be careful” what I said, because “we don’t want to lose you…” But when I refused to back down, their tactics became more direct. I was accused of spreading misinformation—despite providing mountains of evidence—and warned that my activism could “damage my reputation.” It was clear they wanted me to stop asking questions. I didn’t, and after being warned about my “behaviour” once too often, I walked out – but not before sending a damning email to hundreds, if not thousands, of council workers, accusing the council’s top brass of fraud, misfeasance and child abuse.

By October 2021, I was working with Phil Hyland of PJH Law, and together we sent the council a formal letter warning them of the crimes they’d be complicit in if they continued. It still feels surreal that I got to be part of that. I’d already sent similar notices and detailed evidence to the local health board, but both the council and NHS ignored everything I submitted.

Then, in December 2021, things escalated when an NHS “Consultant in Public Health” closed a local primary school, forcing children into self-isolation until they could produce a negative PCR test before they could return. Knowing the truth about these tests—their inaccuracies, their misuse—I couldn’t stay quiet. This wasn’t just bad policy; it was child abuse. We issued a Notice to Cease and Desist to Dr Regina McDevitt. We attached the PJH Law letter we’d sent to the council, along with the evidence pack detailing the harm these policies were causing.

This time, there was a reaction. But instead of addressing the harm to children or engaging with the evidence, NHS Dumfries & Galloway’s CEO, Jeff Ace, decided instead to ban me from all NHS premises for six months.

This was a bizarre move, especially since I hadn’t set foot in an NHS building for years. I was still entitled to go for medical appointments (although I had none), but presumably not allowed to visit patients, although I didn’t know anyone in hospital at the time, so no difference there. I was still entitled to submit FOI requests as I had been doing, but presumably not allowed to protest by waving placards outside NHS buildings, which I wasn’t doing anyway. But, as pointless and absurd as it may be, banned I was.

I can only suspect Jeff’s motive was to to feel better about himself, like he’d actually achieved something, but here’s the irony: while they were busy “punishing” me, they quietly dropped the requirement for children to produce negative PCR tests before returning to school. So, in the end, something got through. But the message was clear: dissent would not be tolerated.

Since then, I’ve kept busy. I’ve been prodding, poking, and shining a light on the fraud and abuse that fuelled the covid tyranny. This wasn’t just about masks or tests; it was about the false claims of authority that let these institutions get away with it all.

Last year, I had the honour of being interviewed by Dr Ahmad Malik about my activism. We discussed the council’s capitulation on masks, the informed consent documents I created, and how this fight has unfolded. And now, HART have invited me to share my story as someone who chose the difficult path by communicating the truth about covid policies and their effects.

Looking back, I’m pleased to say that the threats didn’t stop me. Neither did losing my career. And while I’ve chosen that difficult path, I wouldn’t change a thing.

Like I said, it’s been an incredible journey.

MJ Sutherland

Founder of Declaration of Dumfries

December 27, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , | Leave a comment

Global Engagement Center officially shuts down, but censorship efforts likely to persist through State Department offices

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | December 27, 2024

“The GEC is dead – long live the GEC!” That would be one way to summarize the situation around the US State Department’s Global Engagement Center (GEC) that has formally shut down.

But judging by previous announcements, the move could prove to be by and large symbolic, as there are plans to continue the work by funding it, and assigning the 120 GEC staff to other offices and bureaus.

And the work has included surveilling Americans and flagging their social media posts for censorship in the US, critics have said.

Many Republican lawmakers have been among those critics over the previous years, and so has Elon Musk, who in 2023 did not shy away from branding GEC as “a threat to our democracy” – as the worst among the government entities that engaged in censorship and media manipulation.

Musk, who is now set to become a member of President Trump’s administration, and others raised the alarm when it came to light that the recent spending bill proposal included continued bankrolling of the GEC.

The GEC launched in 2016 and has been repeatedly accused and investigated as essentially an example of a “policy gun” supposedly designed to tackle foreign disinformation challenges, that the outgoing administration turned on its own citizens, threatening their right to free speech online.

The end of GEC as such came with the spending bill passed last week in Congress removing the approximately $61 million in funding that the agency received every year.

When it comes to “the next steps” regarding staff and unfinished GEC projects, the State Department said it was “consulting” with Congress on these issues.

The State Department now on its way out has insisted that the GEC worked to counter Russian, Chinese, etc., disinformation.

But one of the House investigations that looked into the activities of the agency, conducted by the Committee on Small Business, looked into the ways the government funded companies who then damaged competitiveness of small businesses online because of their lawful speech.

The GEC also shows up in an interim report by the House Judiciary Committee’s Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government as coordinating with third parties to censor Americans ahead of the 2020 election.

December 27, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

South Korea votes to impeach acting president

RT | December 27, 2024

South Korea’s Parliament has voted to impeach acting head of state Han Duck-soo over his refusal to appoint justices to the Constitutional Court, local media reported on Friday. The appointments are necessary to finalize the impeachment of Han’s predecessor, President Yoon Suk Yeol, who was stripped of his powers earlier this month.

The motion to impeach Han, filed by the opposition Democratic Party, was passed with 192 votes in favor in the 300-member parliament, called the National Assembly, speaker Woo Won-shik announced in a televised statement.

The National Assembly initially voted to impeach Yoon on December 14 over his brief imposition of martial law in the country. On December 3, he had declared emergency martial law on the grounds that the opposition – which he accused of being sympathetic towards North Korea – had allegedly been preparing a “rebellion.”

The impeachment decision by the National Assembly meant that Yoon was automatically suspended from office. However, in order to complete the procedure, it must be upheld by the Constitutional Court. The nine-member bench is currently short of three judges, and, while it can technically vote with only six members, a single dissenting vote would reinstate Yoon to office under South Korean law.

As interim head of state, Han was expected to appoint the justices to fill the vacancies following requests from the opposition party, which is against Yoon’s reinstatement. On Thursday, the National Assembly passed the appointment consent bill for three candidates, two of which were nominated by the opposition and one by the ruling conservative People Power Party. However, at an emergency press-conference immediately after, Han said he could not appoint the justices right away as the PPP did not support the nominees, and the appointment could harm the constitutional order.

“The consistent principle embedded in our Constitution and laws is to refrain from exercising significant exclusive presidential powers, including the appointment of constitutional institutions,” he argued in his address, adding that “a consensus between the ruling and opposition parties in the National Assembly, representing the people, must first be reached.” In response to this, the opposition proposed impeaching Han as well.

“It has become clear that Prime Minister and acting President Han Duck-soo has neither the qualifications nor the will to protect the Constitution,” Park Chan-dae, the Democratic Party’s floor leader, said in a statement announcing the motion.

Friday’s vote marked the first time in South Korea’s modern history that an impeachment motion has been filed against an acting president. The country’s finance minister, Choi Sang-mok, is now expected to take over as acting president.

December 27, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception | | Leave a comment

Syrians take to streets nationwide against shrine desecration; HTS militants fire on protesters

Press TV – December 26, 2024

Protests have erupted across Syria over militants’ desecration of an Alawite shrine in Aleppo, with armed groups belonging to Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) opening fire on protesters.

Tens of thousands took to the streets in Latakia, Tartus, Homs, Hama, and Qardaha on Wednesday, resulting in violent confrontations.

Protesters came out after video was circulated on social networks showing a fire inside the shrine of Sheikh Abu Abdullah al-Hussein al-Khasibi in Aleppo, with armed men walking inside and killing the guards of the shrine, an incident that has drawn strong condemnation from the Alawite minority.

According to reports from local sources, the protests were spread after armed individuals opened fire on protesters in Homs, resulting in the death of one person and injury of five others.

Video footage circulating on social media captured the moment when the armed groups targeted peaceful demonstrators expressing their outrage over the attack on the historical Alawite figure’s shrine.

The violence continued in the coastal city of Tartus, where deadly clashes broke out between members of the HTS administration’s “interior ministry” and protesters.

In addition to the protests against the attack on the shrine, demonstrators in the city of Masyaf, located in the northwestern countryside of Hama, condemned the assassination of three Alawite judges, which occurred just a day before.

Some residents said the demonstrations were linked to pressure and violence in recent days aimed at members of the Alawite minority.

According to Syrian media outlets, a curfew was imposed from 6 p.m. to 8 a.m. on Thursday in Homs while authorities in Jableh and two other cities also announced a nighttime curfew.

The new Syrian “Interior Ministry” claimed on its Telegram account that video footage of the shrine’s destruction was outdated and related to earlier conflicts during the takeover of Aleppo in late November.

However, this assertion has not quelled the public anger, as thousands gathered in protests, demanding justice to be done for the perpetrators of the attacks on their religious heritage.

Alawites are increasingly concerned about potential reprisals against their community, stemming from their status as a minority religious group and their historical ties to the al-Assad family, including ousted President Bashar al-Assad.

Moreover, on Tuesday, hundreds of demonstrators protested in Christian areas of Damascus against the burning of a Christmas tree near Syria’s Hama. The HTS promised to restore it promptly.

The country’s new leaders have repeatedly pledged to hold accountable those responsible for the desecration of religious sites, claiming that they will respect the beliefs and rights of all sects and religions in Syria.

The situation remains very fluid and fragile, with potential risk for further clashes as sectarian sentiments continue to boil over amid the ongoing political instability and pressures on minority groups.

December 26, 2024 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment