US is a police state persecuting its citizens
By Lucas Leiroz | August 8, 2024
The US government continues its violent persecution of all citizens who express opinions contrary to the foreign policy of the White House. Once again, the country’s authorities unjustifiably harassed military analyst Scott Ritter, raiding his house under the allegation that Ritter is a “foreign agent.” Apparently, any American citizen who disagrees with the policy of war with Russia is considered a “spy” by the government, which shows how Washington is becoming an antidemocratic police state.
The FBI and the New York State Police raided Ritter’s house in Bethlehem Township, south of Albany. The agents remained inside Scott’s house for about five hours, collecting materials they considered suspicious. More than two dozen boxes were removed from the place by the police containing various items meant for investigation, including several electronic devices.
The police presented a search and seizure warrant based on the Foreign Agents Restriction Act. In practice, this means that for the American police, Scott Ritter is officially a “Russian asset.” The investigations are certainly intended to find some kind of incriminating content that would allow a formal charge of espionage and conspiracy against the American state.
This is not the first time that Scott Ritter has been attacked by the authorities of his own country. The analyst has already lost his passport and the right to leave the US after the American police forcibly escorted him off a plane when he was about to go to the Russian Federation in June. Ritter had been invited to participate in the St. Petersburg Economic Forum, where he was expected to give a talk on a panel about multipolarity and geopolitics. However, shortly after boarding the plane, American guards confiscated his passport without providing any explanation, which is a serious violation of basic individual rights.
Now, with the FBI’s harassment, Scott’s situation is even more complicated. Without a passport, he is unable to leave the country to seek political asylum in another state. Having to remain on American soil, he is likely to be increasingly targeted by Washington’s authorities, who have become well-known for implementing a method similar to psychological torture to coerce citizens who disobey the country’s tacit “rule” of supporting the White House’s aggressive foreign policy.
Ritter is a former officer of the US Marine Corps, having served as an intelligence agent specializing in missiles during the Gulf War. He became known for his work as a UN weapons inspector in Iraq, having been an opponent of the US invasion of the country. At the time, Ritter repeatedly stated that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction, and therefore the US military action was unjustified. The judicial and police harassment against him began in the early 2000s precisely in retaliation for his pro-peace stance.
In the same vein, having studied Russian affairs academically, Ritter is deeply familiar with the history of the Russian-Ukrainian crisis and has been a vocal critic of the US policy of arming Kiev since 2022. He advocates a peaceful policy between the US and Russia and the establishment of mutually favorable conditions for coexistence. In the same vein, Ritter has used his military expertise to debunk some fallacious Western narratives about the situation on the battlefield.
Since 2022, he has been pointing out how Russian troops maintain complete control over the military situation, with Ukraine having no chance of reversing this scenario. Ritter’s work is seen as a threat by the Western propaganda machine, which constantly needs to spread lies to convince public opinion to continue supporting Ukraine. Ritter’s situation has become even worse since October 2023, when he spoke out against Israel’s violent incursions into Gaza and has become a critic of US support for Netanyahu. The persecution of Ritter has escalated since then, with both the pro-Ukraine and pro-Israel lobbies now targeting him.
In fact, what is happening to Ritter is just one example of how the US is becoming a police state. Democracy and freedom of speech are no longer part of American political principles – at least not on a practical level, being just pointless rhetoric. Unfortunately, Ritter is likely to face even more police and judicial abuse, since without a passport he has no way of leaving the country to escape persecution. The same fate awaits any American citizen who dares to publicly criticize the international crimes committed by Washington.
Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert.
You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.
FBI raids Scott Ritter’s house

RT | August 7, 2024
Federal agents and state police have searched the house of former US Marine and UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter in New York state on Wednesday.
State Police and FBI agents descended on the street of Bethlehem township, south of Albany, around noon, according to the local outlet Times-Union. They carried “more than two dozen boxes” out of the house just before 5pm local time.
The law enforcement executed a search warrant “related to concerns apparently the US government has about violations of the Foreign Agent Restriction Act (FARA)” Ritter told reporters gathered outside the house after the agents left.
He denied any allegations of wrongdoing and said the federal government was trying to intimidate him.
An FBI spokesperson confirmed “law enforcement activity in connection with an ongoing federal investigation,” but would say nothing further.
Ritter is a former US Marine Corps major who served as a UN weapons inspector in Iraq during the 1990s. He opposed the 2003 US invasion, insisting that Saddam Hussein’s government did not have weapons of mass destruction, as Washington claimed at the time.
He has also been an RT contributor and saw his passport seized by the US government when he tried to attend the St Petersburg International Economic Forum in June.
Jim Hoffman, Ritter’s neighbor across the street for two decades, told the Times-Union that the former inspector has kept a low profile.
“When he came out against the Iraq War back in early 2000s, he was vilified everywhere,” Hoffman said. “Honestly, he was right. He said there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.”
Ritter himself has not posted anything about the raid on social media. His most recent post on X was from Tuesday’s meeting with independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
The administrators of his Telegram channel posted photos of the raid and said they have not heard from him either.
US spying on Tulsi Gabbard – whistleblowers

RT | August 7, 2024
The US government has put former Hawaii Representative Tulsi Gabbard on a special air traffic surveillance list, according to a group of Air Marshal whistleblowers.
Gabbard served in Congress for eight years (2013-2021) and ran for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020, but left the party in 2022 over ideological differences. She is also a lieutenant-colonel in the US Army reserve.
For the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), however, Gabbard appears to be a security risk. Last month, she was placed into the ‘Quiet Skies’ program and monitored wherever she flies, according to the Air Marshal National Council (AMNC).
The outlet UncoverDC reported this week that Gabbard has “two Explosive Detection Canine Teams, one Transportation Security Specialist (explosives), one plainclothes TSA Supervisor, and three Federal Air Marshals [FAMs] on every flight she boards,” citing AMNC director Sonya LaBosco.
AMNC posted on X that the claim came from their whistleblowers, who are ready to go on the record with the appropriate documentation.
The group has also claimed that the TSA and FAMS have “initiated armed government surveillance on high level conservative politicians,” and that the information they intend to reveal will “horrify and sicken you as Americans.”
LaBosco has accused the TSA and its parent department, Homeland Security, of engaging in a “big domestic surveillance grab” that seems to be targeting conservatives. According to the group, Quiet Skies has been used against several people who attended the January 6, 2021 protest at the US Capitol – and their family members, including infants.
According to LaBosco, Gabbard was placed on the list on July 23, a day after she criticized President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris in a Fox News interview. FAMs were mobilized the very next day and followed her on a July 25 flight, LaBosco said.
Gabbard famously rattled Harris during the 2020 Democratic primary debates, bringing up her prosecutorial record. She also denounced Hillary Clinton as “the queen of warmongers,” after the former presidential candidate accused her of being a “Russian asset.”
Most recently, Gabbard told podcaster Lex Fridman that “all the statements and comments that the [Biden-Harris White House] has made from the beginning of this war essentially point to their objective being to basically destroy Russia.”
Gabbard has not yet commented on the whistleblower revelations. She has just returned from Oklahoma, where she took command of a drill sergeant battalion that runs the US Army basic training program.
According to the TSA, ‘Quiet Skies’ is a tool that allows the FAMS to “focus on travelers who may present an elevated risk to aviation security.” The agency claims to have developed “a set of risk-based, intelligence-driven scenario rules,” under strict DHS oversight and respect for privacy and civil rights.
UK Police Blame Social Media for Unrest
By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | August 7, 2024
While some observers explain the chaos that has erupted in the UK in the wake of an attack that resulted in the murder of three children as an outburst based on societal issues that have been bubbling beneath the surface for a long time – the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) sees”disinformation” as the main culprit.
Inaccurate or misleading posts on social media could serve as the trigger for protests and riots, and the NPCC, which is coordinating law enforcement in the UK, is focusing on “silenc(ing) those intent on spreading false news” – suggesting that this institution’s stance is that the unrest has no other meaningful deep underlying causes.
This is clear from the tone NPCC has taken, referring to “so-called protests” and, “criminals pretending to be protesters.” In other words, the crisis is simply down to “criminals” reading “fake news” on social media.
And so, it is disinformation that is “a huge driver” behind the violence, and, “we know a lot of those attending these so-called protests are doing so in direct response to what they’ve read online,” said a report on the NPCC site, quoting its public order lead, B.J. Harrington.
Harrington also revealed that the police acted “swiftly” across the country to make 147 arrests in connection to the clashes – adding that he expects that number to increase.
Regarding posts NPCC considers to be fake news and disinformation, this official noted that “high profile accounts” are to blame for their proliferation.
And, NPCC – but not only – is “working hard” to “silence those intent on spreading false news.”
Harrington said that law enforcement is achieving this together with communities and “our partners” – without naming the latter. But he did inform the public that both police officers and intelligence teams are engaged in identifying people involved.
As soon as the protests, which in places turned violent, erupted, a number of former and current government and intelligence officials immediately blamed “foreign meddling” and “misinformation” for the turn the events took after the fatal Southgate stabbing attack.
State AGs Criticize Janet Yellen for “Fearmongering” on De-Banking Bans

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | August 6, 2024
20 attorney-generals from Republican states have penned a letter addressed to US Treasury Department Secretary Janet Yellen, in protest of the Treasury’s apparent push to stigmatize anti-de-banking laws as “harmful to national security.”
We obtained a copy of the letter for you here.
The signatories, led by Florida AG Ashley Moody, cited the Treasury’s recent letter that went after those states that either have or are preparing to enact laws aimed at protecting clients from de-banking.
The Treasury’s letter (sent by Undersecretary Brian Nelson), they write, was critical of laws like Florida’s HB 989, designed to prevent banks from denying financial services “based on factors that are not grounded in measurable risks.”
Previously, the Treasury prohibited banks from doing this, except in cases when a client was documented as unable to meet quantitative, impartial risk-based standards.
“Importing political activism into financial regulation” is how the Republican AGs now describe this marked shift in policy.
The AGs see opposition to said legislation as the Treasury ignoring its statutory role and serving instead to promote the Biden-Harris Administration’s campaign described as radical and fearmongering and meant to advance “activists’ extreme agendas” while sowing confusion about the purpose and nature of those state laws.
According to the letter, that purpose is to promote “responsible money management and protecting consumers from discrimination.”
But the Treasury’s meddling – bringing up national security in this context in order to allow large financial institutions and banks to abuse power – is advancing the political goals of “activists,” the AGs claim.
The activists here would be anti-conservative ones, those trying to remove access to bank services to gun manufacturers, among others.
Undersecretary Nelson’s letter made the assertion that state laws to prevent such policies by financial institutions are “interfering” with the ability to “comply with national security requirements.”
Nelson went on to claim that the legislation he singled out meant “heightened risk” of international drug traffickers, transnational organized criminals, terrorists, and corrupt foreign officials using the US financial system to not only threaten national security but also “launder money, evade sanctions.”
The Treasury has since said that this was a reaction to a “bipartisan letter from members of Congress” who expressed these concerns and that this department agrees with their stance on the issue.
But the AGs say that Nelson’s letter “deliberately misleads financial institutions about these state laws, for example, by falsely suggesting that laws such as Florida’s HB 989 would prohibit financial institutions from considering whether a consumer is associated with designated terrorist groups.”
The letter concludes that the signatories “join with the majority of Americans in looking forward to the day when federal regulators will focus on their statutory duties, rather than on advancing radical political causes and stoking unfounded fear about state laws.”
Russia decries ‘routine repression’ of dissidents in EU states

RT | August 7, 2024
The West is turning into a “neoliberal dictatorship” that is intolerant of any form of dissent, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova claimed on Wednesday. She was commenting on the prosecution of journalist Svetlana Burtseva by EU member Estonia.
Burtseva, a 57-year-old naturalized Estonian citizen, was charged this week under an article of the Estonian penal code that prohibits relations with a foreign entity with the intention of committing treason.
Specifically, Burtseva was accused of writing under a pen name for a Baltic-focused Russian-language news outlet that belongs to the Russian media group Rossiya Segodnya, which is sanctioned by the EU.
Estonian officials have claimed Burtseva committed subversive activities such as writing a book that “belittles” the Baltic country, as claimed by public prosecutor Eneli Laurits.
Commenting on the case, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Zakharova said that “similar to other ‘advanced democracies’ of the Baltics, Estonia continues to systematically use repression as a routine tool for quashing dissent.”
She described the allegations against Burtseva as “obviously fabricated” and claimed that they reflect Tallin’s “flawed and absolutely irreconcilable” attitude to opposition.
Moscow perceives the prosecution as an attempt to punish Burtseva for journalism and voicing opinions critical of the Estonian government. International bodies that should defend freedom of speech share the blame, since they have neglected their duties and have long turned a blind eye to the stifling of critical press by the Baltic states, the diplomat argued.
The entire situation “showcases the deep crisis and the deterioration of the Western-style democracy, how it is morphing into a neoliberal dictatorship,” Zakharova concluded.
NY county bans masks used to hide identities in Pro-Palestine protests

Al Mayadeen | August 7, 2024
A bill banning people from wearing masks to shield their identity during pro-Palestine protests against the US support for “Israel’s” genocide in Gaza was passed in Nassau County in New York state on Monday, with 12 Republicans in the legislature voting in favor of the new law, while seven Democrats abstained.
Republican lawmakers claim that the bill applies to any form of public demonstrations to prevent protesters engaging in “violence and hate crimes” from hiding their identities and eluding responsibility. Civil rights advocates and the New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU) have criticized this new legislation, deeming it a violation of the right to free speech.
“Masks protect people who express political opinions that are unpopular,” Susan Gottehrer, Nassau County regional director of NYCLU, said. “Making anonymous protest illegal chills political action and is ripe for selective enforcement.”
If demonstrators break the newly passed law, they would be charged with a misdemeanor where they can face up to a year in imprisonment and a $1,000 fine. However, the bill exempts wearing masks for medical and religious reasons.
“Unless someone has a medical condition or a religious imperative, people should not be allowed to cover their face in a manner that hides their identity when in public,” Republic Nassau County Executive Bruce Blakeman said.
“Nassau County police offers are not health professionals or religious experts capable of deciding who needs a mask and who doesn’t,” Gottehrer said, highlighting the inadequacy of the exceptions.
Germany convicts pro-Palestine activist for ‘From river to sea’ chant
The restriction of freedom of speech when it comes to protesting in solidarity for Palestinians while condemning the ongoing aggression in Gaza is not limited to the United States, and is a common theme with governments complicit in the genocide.
A Berlin court has convicted pro-Palestine activist Ava Moayeri, a 22-year-old German-Iranian national, for the “crime” of leading the chant “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” back in October.
The presiding judge, Birgit Balzer, ordered Moayeri to pay a 600 euro fine. While the 22-year-old’s defense team argued that the conviction was a violation of free speech.
Balzer argued that precedents documented in different courts that describe the slogan as “ambiguous” were incomprehensible, considering the chant a declaration against the “right of the State of Israel to exist.”
Moayeri co-organized an October 11 protest in Berlin’s Neukölln district, allegedly to condemn school violence after a teacher smacked a pro-Palestinian student protesting. Police claimed the protest featured Palestinian flags and Kouffiyehs, disputing her testimony.
Moayeri’s legal team defended the slogan as part of the Palestine solidarity movement and denied any antisemitism.
It’s Weird to See a Retired General Scotch a Plea Bargain
By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | August 5, 2024
Given that we have all been born and raised under a national-security state form of governmental structure, no one in the mainstream press is batting an eyelash over Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin’s role in a plea bargain into which military prosecutors had entered with three men who are accused of participating in the 9/11 attacks, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Walid bin Attash, and Mustafa al-Hawsawix. Austin scotched the plea bargain because it eliminated the possibility of a death sentence for the three men.
To be sure, there are some mainstream pundits who have expressed disagreement with Austin’s decision to cancel the plea bargain. But none of them question the very notion that a retired military general is making a major decision in a case involving criminal justice. That’s because the mainstream press, along with many Americans, has come to accept the normality and permanence of the judicial system that the Pentagon established in Cuba after the 9/11 attacks.
But the fact is that Austin’s role in a criminal prosecution is weird — extremely weird. A retired military general serving as U.S. Secretary of Defense has no more legitimate role in America’s criminal-justice system than he does in America’s public-school system.
The U.S. Constitution established one judicial system. It consists of U.S. District Courts, federal courts of appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court. It encompasses both civil and criminal jurisdiction. Under the Constitution, when the U.S. government targets someone with criminal prosecution, it must do so within the rules and constraints of the federal-court system.
In other words, the Constitution did not set up two dual, competing criminal-justice systems — one run by civilians and one run by the military. It set up only one criminal-justice system. And that one judicial system is subject to the constraints of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, specifically the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments.
Contrary to popular opinion, terrorism is not an act of war. It is a criminal offense under the U.S. Code. When someone is charged with the crime of terrorism, the Constitution requires that he be treated like any other defendant in the federal-court system.
What happened after the 9/11 attacks, however, was that the military-intelligence establishment seized on the crisis, panic-filled environment to establish a brand new dual, competing judicial system at its imperial outpost in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Mind you, there was no constitutional authority for such a judicial system but given the climate of “emergency” and the dominant role that the national-security establishment had already come to play in America’s federal governmental system, the Pentagon knew that no one would interfere with its new judicial system.
Thus, under America’s dual, competing judicial systems, the military now decides how an accused terrorist is going to be handled. If the military decides that an accused terrorist, whether foreigner or American, should go into the constitutional system, that’s where he will go. In fact, there have been a number of criminal prosecutions for terrorism in America’s federal-court system, both before and after the 9/11 attacks.
However, if the military decides that an accused terrorist, including an American citizen, will instead be placed in the military’s judicial system at Gitmo, that’s where he will end up. That’s why the plea bargain into which the accused 9/11 planners entered was done with military prosecutors rather than with U.S. Attorneys and assistant U.S. Attorneys.
The difference between these two judicial systems is like day and night. In the constitutional system, the accused has the right to a speedy trial, the right to trial by jury, the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses, the right to be free from cruel and unusual punishments, and other procedural protections.
None of those protections exists for people who are shunted into the military’s judicial system at Gitmo. That’s why criminal defendants have been held there for some 20 years without a trial — there is no right to a speedy trial at Gitmo. The accused can also be convicted on hearsay evidence, which means that he has no right to confront and cross-examine witnesses. He can be tortured into confessing to his crimes. He has no right to trial by jury. Instead his guilt or innocence is determined by a military commission whose kangaroo-court-like verdict will inevitably turn on pleasing superior officers.
This entire dual, competing judicial system is about as weird as weird can get, including the fact that a retired military general now wields the authority to involve himself in plea bargains in criminal prosecutions. The fact that this weird judicial system has become a normal and permanent part of American life just goes to show how the national-security establishment controls, manages, and directs the federal government, with the other three branches simply playing a supportive role. See National Security and Double Government by Michael J. Glennon.
FBI To Resume Meetings With Social Media Companies, Ignoring Censorship Concerns
By Christina Maas | Reclaim The Net | August 5, 2024
Here we go again – another US election is coming up, and there’s another push to find ways to censor “disfavored” voices, and one of those ways is the focus on the foreign malign influence (FMI) boogeyman.
Americans (and the world) have seen this play out already before and after the contested 2020 vote.
The infamous case of the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop news story came after the FBI issued a warning to social media companies about an incoming FMI “disinformation dump” – from Russia.
We know how that went and was eventually debunked, the laptop being authentic, rather than a figment of some “disinformation” peddling operation’s imagination. But here is the FBI again, more than just emboldened by the recent Supreme Court’s ruling in the Murthy v. Missouri case.
That decision lifted an injunction that banned the US government from colluding with Big Tech in order to promote censorship. Now the case is back in the lower courts, and in the meanwhile, mere months before the election, the legal hurdle to resume suspected collusion has been cleared.
And so the FBI will now “resume regular meetings” with social media companies, the pretext being finding ways to combat “potential” FMI threats. The Hunter Biden laptop scandal illustrates very well how the supposed hunt for FMI can go astray, straight into the political censorship territory.
But none of that seems to matter now, as the current White House presses on with the old practices. On July 12 this year, just after the Supreme Court’s decision, Department of Justice (DOJ) Associate Deputy Attorney General George D. Turner penned a memo that shows the collusion never really stopped – even after last October’s court injunction restricting this type of “collaboration.”
We obtained a copy of the memo for you here.
The memo reads that after this, the DOJ – always “appropriately accounting for First Amendment considerations” (wouldn’t it be easier to say – without violating the First Amendment?) – “began developing a standardized approach for sharing FMI information with social media companies.”
Come February, and the FBI started using that standardized approach and “actively sharing FMI threat information with social media companies on a continuing basis.”
And now, on top of that, the FBI is free to resume regular meetings with social media companies.
Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson Is Encouraging Residents To Report Neighbors for “Misinformation”

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | August 6, 2024
Michigan’s Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson has launched a campaign to root out supposed “election misinformation” – by urging the state’s residents to report each other.
As if more chaotic divisiveness was needed ahead of the November vote, the idea here, in one of the swing states, seems to be to get people to keep an eye on their neighbors, and if what they see and hear is interpreted as “misinformation” – report it, complete with a photo, “if possible.”
A document from Benson’s office provides a Michigan government email as the address for such reports, while the call to this type of action can be found on the official page about “voter education resources.”
The Michigan Bureau of Elections has published a document that aims to address a host of threats to “a healthy democracy” – foreign, domestic, partisan, “or simply malicious.”

Their actions – and that would be “misinformation” about the election process, voter rights, “or even an issue on the ballot” – are presented as a serious threat to election security.
Other than reporting anything they consider to be misinformation about voting and elections in the state, residents are encouraged to seek sources of information and media outlets that offer “true” stories.
Voters are treated as not entirely capable of critical thinking regarding their news, so to help with this, the Bureau recommends itself as a “trusted, verified, non-partisan” place where information can be checked as true or untrue.
Here come the “fact-checkers.” These are the places people in Michigan are recommended to go to in order to seek “truth about elections”: the state’s own government’s “SOSFactCheck” page, but also left-leaning Snopes, FactCheck, and PolitiFact.
The Bureau, however, says they are in the business of debunking misinformation, conspiracy theories, hoaxes, and verifying the “accuracy of political speech” – whatever that may include – as well as of ads, debates, interviews, statements, press releases.
Speaking of “non-partisan” activities, the Democrat secretary of state just recently introduced a program called “Democracy Ambassador,” which promises those who join will receive information about “non-partisan facts and resources” which they should then spread in their communities.
“Squash misinformation before it spreads,” is one of the messages.
But that’s not all from Jocelyn Benson. Yet another recent document from her office focused on “misinformation and AI.” Here, residents are warned about “partisans, grifters, and other opportunists here at home” out to “hack the minds of American citizens.”
Argentina’s AI and the Rise of Pre-Crime Digital Surveillance
By Ken Macon | Reclaim The Net | August 5, 2024
Argentina’s new initiative to launch the Applied Artificial Intelligence for Security Unit (UIAAS) represents a concerning step toward a surveillance-heavy approach to tackling crime. Under the guise of innovation, this unit, embedded within the Ministry of Security, integrates artificial intelligence to not only sift through vast amounts of historical crime data but also to monitor social media activities ostensibly to predict and preempt criminal behavior.
This approach raises significant ethical questions, especially regarding privacy and civil liberties. The idea that AI can predict future crimes based on patterns might sound efficient, but it harbors risks of overreach, profiling, and potentially unjustified surveillance. The emphasis on monitoring social media activities and detecting “potential threats” could easily slide into invasive scrutiny of everyday citizens’ lives under a loosely defined mandate.
Critics have voiced many concerns. Their skepticism highlights a broader apprehension about the trade-offs between using AI in law enforcement and the erosion of personal freedoms. The capacity for AI to be misused under the pretext of security could set a dangerous precedent, potentially leading to a dystopian reality where personal spaces and freedoms are heavily compromised by state surveillance.
Argentina’s pioneering step, therefore, should be viewed critically, demanding rigorous scrutiny and debate to ensure that the pursuit of security does not trample the very liberties it aims to protect. The line between safeguarding citizens and surveilling them must be navigated with caution to prevent an unsettling shift towards an AI-driven surveillance state.

Zeolite is old. It is in Roman concrete that has held for two thousand years. It’s in the water filters of ancient cisterns. It’s in the stomachs of Pacific livestock whose keepers knew, somehow, that this grey crumbling rock made the animals healthier. It’s in Soviet clinical protocols from the 1960s. It’s in the standard emergency response to the Chernobyl explosion.