UK Government Secretly Orders Apple to Build Global iCloud Backdoor, Threatening Digital Privacy Worldwide
The UK government’s extremism is a global threat to privacy, a new report shows
By Christina Maas | Reclaim The Net | February 7, 2025
Imagine waking up one morning to find out your government has demanded the master key to every digital iPhone lock on Earth — without telling anyone. That’s exactly what British security officials have tried to pull off, secretly ordering Apple to build a backdoor into iCloud that would allow them to decrypt any user’s data, anywhere in the world. Yes, not just suspected criminals, not just UK citizens — everyone. And they don’t even want Apple to talk about it.
This breathtakingly authoritarian stunt, first reported by The Washington Post, is one of the most aggressive attempts to dismantle digital privacy ever attempted by a so-called Western democracy. It’s the kind of thing you’d expect from regimes that plaster their leader’s face on every street corner, not from a country that still pretends to believe in civil liberties.
The Order: Total Access, Zero Oversight
This isn’t about catching a single terrorist or cracking a single case. No, this order — issued in secret last month by Keir Starmer’s Labour government — demands universal decryption capabilities, effectively turning Apple into a surveillance arm of the UK government. Forget warrants, forget oversight, forget even the pretense of targeted investigations. If this order were obeyed, British authorities would have the power to rifle through anyone’s iCloud account at will, no justification required.
The officials pushing for this monstrosity are hiding behind the UK’s Investigatory Powers Act of 2016, a law so Orwellian it’s lovingly referred to as the “Snoopers’ Charter.” This piece of legislative overreach forces tech companies to comply with government spying requests while making it illegal to even disclose that such demands have been made. It’s the surveillance state’s dream—limitless power, zero accountability.
Apple’s Answer: Thanks, But No Thanks
Apple, to its credit, has not rolled over — yet. Instead of turning itself into an informant for MI5, the company is reportedly considering pulling encrypted iCloud storage from the UK entirely. In other words, British users could lose a major security feature because their government is hell-bent on playing digital dictator.
But even that isn’t enough for UK authorities, who aren’t just demanding access to British accounts. They want a skeleton key to iCloud data worldwide, including in the US That’s right—British intelligence, in a stunning display of overreach, is trying to force an American company to compromise American users on American soil.
The “Appeal” Process: A Kafkaesque Farce
Technically, Apple has the right to challenge this order. But in true dystopian fashion, its only option is to plead its case before a secret technical panel, which will then determine if the request is too expensive. If that doesn’t work, Apple can go before a judge, who will decide whether the demand is “proportionate” to the government’s needs. Because if there’s one thing we know about government surveillance, it’s that it’s always reasonable and restrained.
Meanwhile, Apple has refused to comment, likely because doing so would be a criminal offense under UK law. That’s right — even talking about the demand could land Apple executives in legal trouble. Nothing screams “free society” like threatening jail time for discussing government overreach.
Here’s the wider issue: even if Apple were to challenge this draconian demand, it wouldn’t matter. The law requires immediate compliance — meaning that even as Apple fights the order, it would still be forced to hand over the keys in the meantime. It’s the legal equivalent of being forced to serve a prison sentence while appealing your conviction. By the time the courts make a decision, the damage is already done.
Apple, to its credit, saw this Orwellian nightmare coming from a mile away. Last year, it explicitly warned British lawmakers that such a demand would be nothing less than an assault on global privacy. The company made its stance clear:
“There is no reason why the U.K. [government] should have the authority to decide for citizens of the world whether they can avail themselves of the proven security benefits that flow from end-to-end encryption.”
In other words: Who the hell does Britain think it is? The UK government, in its wisdom, apparently believes it should have the power to determine how encryption works for everyone, everywhere, not just in its own backyard. Because why stop at surveillance when you can have global surveillance?
The Official Non-Denial Denial
Of course, when asked about this breathtakingly bold power grab, the UK Home Office fell back on the bureaucrat’s favorite escape hatch: refusing to confirm or deny reality itself.
“We do not comment on operational matters, including for example confirming or denying the existence of any such notices.”
In other words, “We won’t admit we’re demanding this, but we won’t deny it either.” Because why be transparent when you can keep the public guessing?
How the UK Plans to Kill Encryption by Exploiting the Cloud
For those still clinging to the idea that end-to-end encryption will protect their messages from prying eyes, here’s the bad news: the UK government already has a backdoor, and most people don’t even realize it.
Yes, apps like iMessage, WhatsApp, and Signal use end-to-end encryption, meaning only the sender and recipient can read the messages. But the moment you back up those encrypted chats to the cloud? They become fair game. Law enforcement can demand access through legal orders, bypassing encryption entirely.
Apple’s Advanced Data Protection was designed to close this loophole, giving users a way to keep their cloud backups as secure as their messages. And that, of course, is precisely why the UK wants to kill it.
Because for governments that dream of unlimited surveillance, letting people secure their own data is simply unacceptable.
The UK Is Now Outpacing the US in Anti-Privacy Extremism
For years, the US has led the charge in trying to undermine encryption, with the FBI repeatedly demanding backdoors and government officials throwing tantrums whenever a tech company refuses to play ball. But even America has never gone this far.
Now, Britain is attempting to leap ahead, pushing for surveillance powers that would force not just UK companies, but global tech giants to comply — regardless of where their users live. And Apple? It’s just the first target.
Google, which has offered default encrypted backups for Android since 2018, could easily be next. When asked whether the UK or any other government had made similar demands, Google spokesperson Ed Fernandez gave a carefully worded response:
“Google can’t access Android end-to-end encrypted backup data, even with a legal order.”
That’s a fancy way of saying “We don’t have the keys, and we’re not planning to give them up.” But how long until the UK demands that Google build a key, just like it’s demanding from Apple?
And then there’s Meta. WhatsApp’s encrypted backups are another thorn in the side of surveillance-hungry governments. When pressed on whether they had received any secret orders for access, Meta, predictably, refused to comment.
Khamenei: Negotiations with US have no effect on solving problems
Press TV – February 7, 2025
Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei says experience has shown that negotiations with the US have no effect on solving Iran’s problems.
His remarks in a meeting with Air Force personnel in Tehran on Friday came hours after the US imposed its first sanctions in the wake of President Donald Trump’s signing of an order to reimpose his “maximum pressure” on Iran.
“Some people pretend that if we sit at the negotiating table, some problem will be solved, but the fact that we must understand correctly is that negotiating with the US has no effect on solving the country’s problems.”
He cited the experience of 2015 when Iran and six other countries, including the US, signed the now-dormant Joint Comprehensive of Plant of Action (JCPOA) after two years of negotiations, only to be discarded by President Trump in 2018.
Ayatollah Khamenei recalled the grueling back and forth, which included a 15-minute stroll by then-US Secretary of State John Kerry and Mohammad Javad Zarif in downtown Geneva and along the Rhone River which landed the former Iranian foreign minister in hot water.
“Our government at the time sat down and negotiated – they continued to come and go, they sat down and stood up and negotiated, they talked, laughed, shook hands, made friends, everyone worked, and a treaty was formed.
“In this treaty, the Iranian side was very generous, giving many concessions to the other side. But the Americans did not implement the same treaty,” the Leader said.
“The same person who is in office now tore up the treaty. He said he would tear it down and he did; they didn’t act upon” the agreement, he said, referring to Trump.
“Therefore, negotiating with such a government is unwise, unintelligent and dishonorable and there should be no negotiation with it.”
Before Trump, even the US administration which had accepted the agreement, did not comply with it, the Leader said, referring to the government of president Barack Obama which had signed it.
“The treaty was meant to lift US sanctions, but they were not lifted. Adding insult into injury, they had the UN to have a constant threat hanging over Iran. This treaty was the product of negotiations that lasted about two years.”
Iran is currently in the midst of celebrations marking the anniversary of the Islamic Revolution which sealed the fate of the US-backed Pahlavi regime in 1979.
Every year on February 8, Iranian Air Force personnel meet the Leader to relive the historic allegiance of Air Force officers with the late founder of the Islamic Republic Imam Khomeini in 1979. The event is viewed as a turning point which led to the victory of the Islamic Revolution three days later.
Ayatollah Khamenei said the Americans are busy working “on paper to change the map of the world”, with Iran also being the subject of their plans.
“Of course, it’s only on paper, it has no reality. They also talk about us, make comments, and threaten us,” the Leader said.
Ayatollah Khamenei said, “If they threaten us, we will threaten them. If they put their threat into practice, we will do the same. If they attack the security of our nation, we will attack their security without hesitation.”
“This is a lesson taken from the Qur’an and the teachings of Islam, and it is our duty to act as such. We hope that God Almighty will make us successful in carrying out our duties,” he added.
USAID or SorosAid? How US Tax Dollars Fund Chaos Worldwide
By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 07.02.2025
Soros’ vast NGO network has spent over $20 billion since 2000 on radical liberal causes across the world. Tens of millions or even billions of US taxpayer dollars were funneled through USAID, observers suspect.
- The Soros-linked East-West Management Institute received over $260 million from USAID to influence foreign affairs in Georgia, Uganda, Albania, and Serbia.
- Ukraine’s Anti-Corruption Action Center, backed by Soros, began receiving USAID grants in 2014 – the same year the US-backed Euromaidan coup ousted elected President Viktor Yanukovych with neo-Nazi support. Over $1 million has been funneled by USAID to the center.
- In August 2024, a coup against Bangladeshi PM Sheikh Hasina was allegedly fomented by USAID, IRI, and Soros-linked groups. Her successor, Muhammad Yunus, is a known Clinton and Soros ally. According to The Grayzone, US taxpayer money funded rappers, transgender activists, and LGBT initiatives to create a “power shift.”
- Soros and USAID have long sought to unseat Hungarian PM Viktor Orbán, who has actively opposed the globalist billionaire since 2017. During the 2022 elections, the Soros-linked NGO Action for Democracy funneled $7.6 million to his opposition.
Election Meddling at Home?
- Soros-linked groups, backed by USAID, led resistance efforts against Donald Trump during his presidency, influenced the 2020 election through Black Lives Matter protests, and worked to flip battleground states in 2020–2021.
- Soros funded the Electoral Justice Project, Black Lives Matter’s voter mobilization effort, and gave $22 million to Tides Advocacy, which supported the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation’s pre-election nationwide protests aimed against Trump in 2020.
- USAID and Soros allegedly spent $27 million on anti-Trump prosecutions, claims journalist Mike Benz. Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg was also accused of being “bought” by Soros.
Serbia will revisit foreign agents law – deputy PM
RT | February 7, 2025
Serbian Deputy Prime Minister Aleksandar Vulin has vowed to keep pushing for a law which would brand foreign-funded NGOs as ‘foreign agents,’ amid Belgrade’s claims that protests rocking Serbia are being funded from abroad.
Vulin’s Movement of Socialists (PS) party, a junior member of the ruling coalition led by the Serbian Progressive Party (SNS), proposed the legislation in November. The same month, the country was hit with a wave of protests, apparently sparked by the collapse of a concrete canopy at a railway station in Novi Sad which killed 15 people.
The demonstrations, primarily involving students, have since spread to the capital Belgrade, leading Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic to claim that foreign agitators were behind the unrest.
“PS will not give up its intention to pass the law on foreign agents. Color revolutions cannot be carried out without a lot of money, and it is allocated and distributed through NGOs,” Deputy PM Vulin told Izvestia in an interview published on Thursday.
“There is the experience of Russia, China, Belarus and other countries that have defeated the West’s attempts to destroy them in the streets,” he said, adding that he will continue pushing for the law, despite the current lack of support from the ruling coalition.
Vulin added that he “will not stop opposing Soros and the Western intelligence services that are destroying us.”
Hungarian-American investor and billionaire George Soros is well known for financing liberal movements and political candidates across the Western world, including in Serbia.
According to a January 2001 article in the Los Angeles Times, “his Soros Foundations Network helped finance several pro-democracy groups, including the student organization Otpor, which spearheaded grass-roots resistance to the authoritarian Yugoslav leader” Slobodan Milosevic.
The proposed legislation would require NGOs receiving over half their funding from abroad and engaging in political activities to register as foreign agents.
In December 2024, the Serbian President said that he would not support the bill. “My answer is no,” Vucic told reporters when asked if he would endorse the draft, but added that parts of it based on its US, European and Russian counterparts could be accepted.
Brussels has expressed deep concern over the bill, stressing that as an EU candidate, Serbia is expected to uphold the bloc’s principles.
The European Economic and Social Committee has stressed that such legislation is incompatible with “the fundamental values of the European Union,” comparing such a development to the divisive foreign agents law in Georgia.
Washington sanctioned officials from the ruling party in Tbilisi and froze around $95 million of aid in response, while the EU suspended Georgia’s membership application process. Tbilisi has accused Western countries of interfering in its home affairs, and trying to start a color revolution.
USAID’s Color Revolutions: Destabilizing States for US Interests
By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 06.02.2025
USAID openly acknowledged its role in regime change operations through “democracy” programs by 2006.
“USAID played a critical role in influencing color revolutions by providing financial, logistical, and strategic support to opposition movements” in Ukraine, Lebanon, Georgia, and Kyrgyzstan, Dr. Marco Marsili of the Portuguese Catholic University’s Institute of Political Studies tells Sputnik.
These regime change operations advanced US geopolitical interests but brought no real benefits to the affected nations, he argues.
“USAID’s activities were framed as democracy promotion, electoral assistance, and civil society development,” Marsili notes. However, the results tell a different story:
“Ukraine and Georgia faced ongoing political instability, Lebanon remained sectarian, and Kyrgyzstan suffered repeated upheavals,” he says.
Here’s a breakdown:
Georgia – Rose Revolution (2003)
- US aid: $103M (2002), $141.16M (2003)
- “Democracy programs” received $23.5M (2002), $21.06M (2003) via USAID, IRI, and NDI for NGOs, activists, and media.
- In 2004, the US admitted it “helped” prepare Georgia’s 2003 election, with US-funded NGOs playing a key role in the regime change.
- USAID noted Georgians “borrowed” Serbia’s 2000 pro-democracy tactics, later influencing Ukraine in 2004.
Ukraine – Orange Revolution (2004)
- US aid: $188.5M (2003), $143.47M (2004)
- “Democracy programs” received $54.7M (2003), $34.11M (2004) via USAID, NED, and the Eurasia Foundation.
- To push a pro-US candidate, USAID launched the Strengthening Electoral Administration in Ukraine Project (SEAUP) in Dec 2003, influencing Ukraine’s parliament and judiciary.
Kyrgyzstan – Tulip Revolution (2005)
- Inspired by Georgia and Ukraine, USAID heavily funded local NGOs, activists, and media before the Feb 2005 election.
- US aid: $56.6M (2003), $50.8M (2004), with “democracy programs” receiving $13.5M (2003), $12.2M (2004).
- George Soros’ Open Society Institute funneled $5M (2003) to Kyrgyzstan’s American University of Central Asia.
Lebanon – Cedar Revolution (2005)
- In March 2005, 1M Lebanese protested, demanding Syria’s military withdrawal, paving the way for pro-US leader Saad Hariri.
- USAID’s 2006 report claimed years of work laid the foundation for the uprising.
- US aid to Lebanon tripled in the early 2000s from $15M to $45M.
Trump hands “best friend” Israel gift for false-flag assassination
By Finian Cunningham | Strategic Culture Foundation | February 6, 2025
Iran will be obliterated if it assassinates U.S. President Donald Trump. He told reporters this week of his “dead man’s switch” while announcing tougher sanctions on Iran in a renewed maximum pressure campaign.
Asked about the danger of being assassinated by Iranian operatives, Trump appeared to dismiss such fears but disclosed that he had left instructions with his aides to destroy Iran in the event of being killed.
“If they did that, they would be obliterated. I’ve left instructions if they do it, they get obliterated, there won’t be anything left.”
It is unclear who the aides are to whom Trump has entrusted the instructions for retaliation. And it is not a done deal that his orders would be carried out if such an extreme scenario materialized.
Several news media reported his dramatic remarks, including ABC, the New York Times, and Sky. The Associated Press editorialized: “If Trump were assassinated, Vice President JD Vance would become president and would not necessarily be bound by any instructions left by his predecessor.”
Nevertheless, the 47th Commander-in-Chief may be tempting fate. His death wish for Iran could be taken as an opportunity for a false-flag operation by Israel.
Bluntly put, if Israeli agents were to kill Trump in a way to frame Iran, then the Israelis stand to gain their big prize of wiping the Islamic Republic off the map, or so they might calculate.
It would, of course, be a treacherous double-cross by Israel. This week Trump hosted Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu, during which the American president was praised as the “best friend” Israel has ever had in the White House. The praise was in response to Trump’s proposed resettlement of all Palestinians from the Gaza Strip to neighboring Arab countries. No wonder Netanyahu was beaming with delight, as Trump’s proposal effectively completes Israel’s long-held desire to ethnically cleanse the enclave.
So would the Israelis really contemplate whacking “best friend” Trump?
Knowing how the Israelis are serial violators of international law, a rogue regime that exults in war crimes, it is not beyond their thinking or doing.
False flag operations are, by definition, designed to be carried out to blame someone else for the foul deed. If an “executive action” job on Trump were done well, Israel would not be seen as the perpetrator. Instead, all the American fury would be directed at Iran.
There is precedent for such treachery. On June 8, 1967, Israeli forces launched a deadly attack on the USS Liberty in the Mediterranean, killing 34 American Navy crew. The incident was during the Six-Day War between Israel and Arab countries. The Israelis tried to blame Egypt for the deadly attack until an official investigation found that it was Israel. The Israelis later apologized and said it was a mistake in the fog of war. U.S. crew members, however, testified that it was a deliberate attack by a supposed ally.
Another alleged false-flag operation was the 9/11 terror attacks on New York and Washington, DC, in 2001, in which 3,000 Americans were killed. Some investigators believe that Israel masterminded that atrocity to mobilize American military intervention in the Middle East to weaken Arab nations. Investigators pointed to the strange case of the “dancing Israelis” – a group of Mossad agents who watched the planes from a distance as they crashed into the Trade Center towers and duly celebrated the spectacle. The offensive revelers were reported by witnesses (who suspected them of being Arabs) and were later arrested by U.S. law enforcement, only to be released weeks later without charge and sent back to Israel, where they were feted on TV shows and disclosed to be Mossad agents.
Several analysts contend that Israel’s priority goal is to inveigle the United States into a war against Iran. That has been Tel Aviv’s de facto policy for many years, viewing Iran as its top threat. Over the past year, Israel has become emboldened by inordinate U.S. military support and its impunity despite genocide in Gaza and aggression towards Lebanon and Syria.
With the Iranian-led Axis of Resistance across the Middle East subdued by a relentless Israeli onslaught, Netanyahu and the Israeli leadership may feel that Iran is vulnerable. But Iran’s firepower is formidable, having struck Israel twice in recent months with large-scale air assaults that broke through Israel’s defense systems.
The Israelis know that they cannot succeed in attacking Iran alone. They need the U.S. to assist in a calculated devastating blow.
During his election campaign last year, Trump endorsed Israeli air strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, but even the impulsive Trump does not seem ready to launch a war on Iran.
That’s where the Israelis may be tempted to carry out a daring false-flag operation to assassinate Trump and bet on his death wish to obliterate Iran being delivered.
Iran has already been fingered for plotting to kill Trump ever since he ordered the assassination of the revered Iranian military commander, Major General Qasem Soleimani, in Baghdad in January 2021, during his first term in the White House.
Last November, the U.S. Department of Justice under the Biden administration claimed to have uncovered an Iranian plot to murder Trump. The claim was dismissed by Iran as an Israeli psyops to ramp up tensions with the U.S. Tehran has denied any such intention to assassinate Trump. Iran said Trump’s latest speculation was “provocative”.
The DOJ’s allegations of an Iranian plot were flimsy and not credible. But, conveniently for Israel, the reports may have planted the seed of thought in the public mind that the Iranians are out to get Trump.
Israel’s crimes against international law seem to know no bounds. Its military intelligence operates on the principle of “waging war by deception.”
Israel has viewed the Islamic Republic as its nemesis since the Iranian revolution in 1979. All the proxy threats surrounding Israel emanate from Iran – the “head of the snake”. If Iran could be wiped out to install a more pliant pro-Western regime then Israel will feel free to expand its “Greater Israel” ambitions in the Middle East. The prospect of knocking out Iran for the Israelis is the ultimate prize.
Trump’s rashly outspoken arrangement to destroy Iran if he is assassinated just handed Israel a nefarious, golden opportunity.
As Iran said, Trump’s loose talk about assassination is provocative. The question is: provoking who?
How CIA & USAID Used Coup Playbook Against Trump
Sputnik – 06.02.2025
Donald Trump’s 2019 impeachment was driven by CIA and USAID operatives, claims US author Michael Shellenberger, known for his work on Elon Musk’s Twitter Files project.
What does Shellenberger assert?
- The whistleblower behind Trump’s July 2019 call with Volodymyr Zelensky, which triggered the impeachment probe, was a CIA analyst
- RealClearPolitics and Washington Examiner previously identified the whistleblower as Eric Ciaramella, a senior Ukraine and Russia analyst at the NSC, CIA, and National Intelligence Council
- The analyst’s complaint relied heavily on an Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) report
- That report alleged two Soviet-born Florida businessmen were “key hidden actors” in Trump’s effort to investigate the Bidens and had linked Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani to former Ukrainian prosecutors
- The OCCRP story was central to House Democrats’ impeachment claim that Trump sent Giuliani to pressure a foreign country to interfere in the 2020 election
- The OCCRP is not independent since 2024 findings by German investigative journalists show that USAID funds it, controls its hiring, and oversees its work plan
- The OCCRP has been involved in regime change operations alongside USAID and the CIA, comparing Trump’s impeachment to past coup d’état efforts
How the CIA Spawned Google
By Svetlana Ekimenko – Sputnik – 05.02.2025
American tech giant Google has faced regulatory scrutiny on numerous occasions amid accusations of antitrust violations. Google’s relationship with the CIA, ranging from early financial support to collaborative efforts have been decried as undermining privacy rights and free speech in the digital landscape.
Google’s creation played a crucial role in the US intelligence community’s scheme to attain global dominance by controlling information.
How it Started
- The Pentagon founded its private sector project the Highlands Forum during the Clinton administration in 1994, according to the INSURGE INTELLIGENCE project.
- Together with defense contractors, the group hammered out a strategy for “network-centric warfare.”
- The 9/11 terrorist attacks were seized upon by US spy agencies to justify not only military invasions across the Muslim world, but also mass surveillance of civilian populations.
CIA Steps In
- The CIA’s Massive Digital Data Systems (MDDS) program, which originated in the 1990s, was designed to enhance query techniques and track users’ digital footprints.
- To better serve its goals, in 1999, the CIA established its own venture capital firm, In-Q-Tel, to invest in potentially useful technologies.
- Ph.D. students at Stanford University, Sergey Brin and Larry Page, were working on precisely such a tech start-up.
- The design of the search engine and algorithms that ultimately evolved into Google was funded by CIA grants through a program aimed at enhancing mass surveillance capabilities.
PRISM
- Whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed in 2013 that the NSA had direct access to Google’s systems through its secret PRISM program, enabling the agency to harvest vast amounts of data on American citizens, Washington’s allies, and foreign nationals.
- Ex-CIA spooks are employed in almost every department at Google, according to a 2022 report based on the analysis of employment websites.
- Google has been slapped with multiple lawsuits stemming from its history of data misuse and privacy violations.
Which left-wing NGOs does Brussels fund in Hungary with taxpayer money to go after Orbán?
By Liz Heflin | Remix News | February 5, 2025
The European Commission is essentially manipulating NGOs to achieve its own goals in exchange for financial support. A Dutch newspaper has exposed part of this process, writes Magyar Nemzet, which then shows how Brussels does this and who the biggest domestic beneficiaries are.
On Jan. 22, De Telegraaf reported on secret contracts that the European Commission had signed with green NGOs to conduct alleged covert lobbying activities. According to the newspaper, the lobbying organizations, commissioned by Brussels with EU money, were tasked with persuading MEPs and member states to support the commission’s ambitious green policy initiatives.
For example, the European Environment Bureau (EEB), an umbrella organization for green groups, was tasked with providing at least 16 examples of how the European Parliament had tightened green legislation thanks to its lobbying. According to documents reviewed by the newspaper, the EEB was also tasked with supporting the controversial nature restoration bill initiated by former Commissioner Frans Timmermans.
In addition, they could use around €700,000 in support to steer the debate on agricultural activity in a more environmentally friendly direction.
In Hungary, the EU provides funding to certain organizations, which then use their activities to serve Brussels’ political goals. Here are some examples.
The Hungarian Helsinki Committee is heavily dependent on international funding. According to their latest available financial report for 2023, more than 61 percent of their annual income came from private foundations, including George Soros’s organization. They received a total of 48.85 million forints from the European Commission, which accounted for 6.1 percent of their income. Helsinki has received funding for various projects serving legal protection purposes, typically for several years.
In recent years, the organization has often criticized the Hungarian government’s immigration policy, especially the measures related to border closures and the operation of transit zones, and has also undertaken the legal representation of migrants, for example, at the European Court of Human Rights.
One of the “results” of Helsinki’s operation is that in June 2024, the European Court of Justice imposed a migration fine of €200 million on Hungary and ordered our country to pay an additional €1 million per day until we change the relevant regulations.
Helsinki has actively contributed to the European Commission’s 2023 Rule of Law Report, which contains a number of criticisms of Hungary, including problems and recommendations in the areas of justice, the fight against corruption, and institutional checks and balances. The Helsinki Committee, together with other NGOs, including Transparency International Hungary, has submitted a nearly 100-page submission to the European Commission, which is withholding billions of euros from Hungary.
Transparency International Hungary (TI Hungary) has regularly attacked the Hungarian government in recent years, primarily on issues related to corruption, lack of transparency, and the management of public funds.
The organization also receives significant foreign funding, including funds from Soros’ Open Society Foundations, but their supporters also include the European Commission, from which they received a total of 13.7 million forints in revenue, according to their 2023 report.
Transparency International produces its Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) every year, which is used to calculate which countries are the most and least corrupt in the world. Tamás Lánczi, president of the Office for the Protection of Sovereignty, has already held the organization accountable for the bias experienced in determining the CPI.
All of this is significant because the index serves as a reference point for the withholding of EU funds due to Hungary.
The 2023 report from Amnesty International Hungary shows that the organization is significantly dependent on foreign sources.
Their revenues from the European Union budget, as well as other states and international organizations, exceeded 170 million forints, which represented 42 percent of their total revenue in that year.
They received almost 53 million forints in funding from the European Commission in 2023, which is almost 13 percent of their total annual income. They received the money as the winner of a call for proposals under the Citizens, Equality, Rights and Value (CERV) program to promote gender equality. Amnesty has been working against Hungary’s interests on several fronts, as shown below.
The organization reports that it prepared its analysis related to the European Commission’s annual rule of law assessment, which examined, among other things, the Hungarian justice system, corruption, the press, civil society organizations, and the legislature. It says: “The success of our work, which has been carried out for four years, together with our civil society friends, is also demonstrated by the fact that many of our recommendations are reflected in the report published in July.”
In other words, they are explicitly proud of having put Hungary at a disadvantage.
The annual report also mentions that in March 2023, in addition to the European Parliament, 15 EU member states joined the European Commission v. Hungary lawsuit filed on the side of the commission over the child protection law adopted in 2021. Amnesty boasts that the actions of many member states are due to their work.
The Hungarian Digital Media Observatory (Lakmusz–HDMO) was established in January 2023 as the Hungarian center of the European Digital Media Observatory (EDMO), established by the European Commission in 2020. Six organizations work together within the framework of the project: Political Capital, Mérték Médiaelemző Műhely, AFP news agency, Lakmusz, Idea Foundation and Epresspack. According to their own admission, their activities include fact-checking and related research and analysis, and they also provide training for journalists and teachers on the topic of fact-checking and conscious media consumption.
The HDMO Project is being implemented with the partial support of the European Commission, and the consortium forming the HDMO was selected by the Commission through an open tender. Lakmusz, which participated in the project, has also previously attacked the Hungarian government. For example, they have tried to discredit the institution of the national consultation on several occasions. Political Capital, Mérték, and Lakmusz can also be directly or indirectly linked to the foundations of George Soros.
“Seek them out and destroy them where they live”
Remembering Merck’s Australian doctor hit list
By John Leake | Courageous Discourse | February 3, 2025
This evening I pondered the news of Caroline Kennedy’s hit letter against her cousin, RFK, Jr., and the fact that she was the Biden Administration’s Ambassador to Australia, and the fact that she has served as a powerful ambassador for Merck’s Gardasil vaccine.
The association of Australia and Merck reminded me of the company’s “seek out and destroy” campaign against Australian doctors who expressed concern that the company’s blockbuster Vioxx seemed to be causing heart attacks and strokes. As was reported by CBS in May 2009:
Merck made a “hit list” of doctors who criticized Vioxx, according to testimony in a Vioxx class action case in Australia. The list, emailed between Merck employees, contained doctors’ names with the labels “neutralise,” “neutralised” or “discredit” next to them.
According to The Australian, Merck emails from 1999 showed company execs complaining about doctors who disliked using Vioxx. One email said:
“We may need to seek them out and destroy them where they live …”
During this same period in the United States, Merck was accused of concealing negative results of clinical Vioxx trials from the FDA and paying reputable doctors to put their names on research they did not conduct or write up. The company also published a fake journal, paying Elsevier to create a phony publication to serve as a marketing tool titled the Australasian Journal of Bone and Joint Medicine.
Ultimately the company was found guilty of knowingly concealing data about the elevated risk of stroke and heart attack from Vioxx and agreed to pay a class action settlement to stroke and heart attack victims totaling $4.85 billion.
I wonder if the nice folks at Merck would ever yield to the temptation to overstate the benefits of the HPV vaccine and downplay its risks, as some plaintiffs have alleged. I also wonder if the company’s PR department might yield to the temptation to smear RFK, Jr. during his Senate confirmation process.
Or am I just being cynical?
“Human Rights NGOs” and the Corruption of Civil Society
By Glenn Diesen | February 4, 2025
Organisations operating under the banner of “human rights non-governmental organisations” (NGOs) have become key actors in disseminating war propaganda, intimidating academics, and corrupting civil society. These NGOs act as gatekeepers determining which voices should be elevated and which should be censored and cancelled.
Civil society is imperative to balance the power of the state, yet the state is increasingly seeking to hijack the representation of civil society through NGOs. NGOs can be problematic on their own as they can enable a loud minority to override a silent majority. Yet, the Reagan doctrine exacerbated the problem as these “human rights NGOs” were financed by the government and staffed by people with ties to intelligence agencies to ensure civil society does not deviate significantly from government policies.
The ability of academics to speak openly and honestly is restricted by these gatekeepers. Case in point, the NGOs limit dissent in academic debates about the great power rivalry in Ukraine. Well-documented and proven facts that are imperative to understanding the conflict are simply not reported in the media, and any efforts to address these facts are confronted with vague accusations of being “controversial” or “pro-Russian”, a transgression that must be punished with intimidation, censorship, and cancellation.
I will first outline my personal experiences with one of these NGOs, and second how the NGOs are hijacking civil society.
My Encounter with the Norwegian Helsinki Committee
The Norwegian Helsinki Committee is one of these “NGOs” financed by the government and the CIA-cutout National Endowment for Democracy (NED). They regularly publish hit pieces about me and rarely miss their weekly tweets that label me a propagandist for Russia. It is always name-calling and smearing rather than anything that can be considered a coherent argument.
The standard formula for cancellation is to shame my university in every article and tweet for allowing academic freedom, with the implicit offer of redemption by terminating my employment as a professor. Peak absurdity occurred with a 7-page article in a newspaper in which it was argued I violated international law by spreading war propaganda. They grudgingly had to admit that I have opposed the war from day one, although for a professor in Russian politics to engage with Russian media allegedly made me complicit in spreading war propaganda.
Every single time I am invited to give a speech at any event, this NGO will appear to publicly shame and pressure the organisers to cancel my invitation. The NGO also openly attempt to incite academics to rally against me to strengthen their case for censorship in a trial of public opinion. Besides whipping up hatred in the media by labelling me a propagandist for Russia, they incite online troll armies such as NAFO to cancel me online and in the real world. After subsequent intimidations through social media, emails, SMS and phone calls, the police advised me to remove my home address and phone number from public access. One of the Norwegian Helsinki Committee recently responded by posting a sale ad for my house, which included photos of my home with my address for their social media followers.
The Norwegian Helsinki Committee also infiltrates and corrupts other institutions. One of the more eager Helsinki Committee employees is also a board member at the Norwegian organisation for non-fictional authors and translators (NFFO) and used his position there to cancel the organisation’s co-hosting of an event as I had been invited to speak. The Norwegian Helsinki Committee is also overrepresented in the Nobel Committee to ensure the right candidates are picked.
Why would a humanitarian NGO act like modern Brownshirts by limiting academic freedom? One could similarly ask why a human rights NGO spend more effort to demonise Julian Assange rather than exploring the human rights abuses he exposed.
This “human rights NGO” is devoted primarily to addressing human rights abuses in the East. Subsequently, all great power politics is framed as a competition between good values versus bad values. Constructing stereotypes for the in-group versus the out-groups as a conflict between good and evil is a key component of political propaganda. The complexity of security competition between the great powers is dumbed down and propagandised as a mere struggle between liberal democracy versus authoritarianism. Furthermore, they rest on the source credibility of being “non-governmental” and merely devoted to human rights, which increases the effectiveness of their messaging.
By framing the world as a conflict between good and evil, mutual understanding and compromise are tantamount to appeasement while peace is achieved by defeating enemies. Thus, these “human rights NGOs” call for confrontation and escalation against whoever is the most recent reincarnation of Hitler, while the people calling for diplomacy are denounced and censored as traitors.
NGOs Hijacking Civil Society
After the Second World War, American intelligence agencies took on a profound role in manipulating civil society in Europe. The intelligence agencies were embarrassed when they were caught, and the solution was to hide in plain sight.
The Reagan Doctrine entailed setting up NGOs that would openly interfere in the civil society of other states under the guise of supporting human rights. The well-documented objective was to conceal influence operations by US intelligence as work on democracy and human rights. The “non-governmental” aspect of the NGOs is fraudulent as they are almost completely funded by the government and staffed with people connected to the intelligence community. Case in point, during Ukraine’s “Orange Revolution” in 2004, an anti-corruption protest was transformed into a pro-NATO/anti-Russian government. The head of the influential NGO Freedom House in Ukraine was the former Director of the CIA.
Reagan himself gave the inauguration speech when he established the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) in 1983. Washington Post wrote that NED has been the “sugar daddy of overt operations” and “what used to be called ‘propaganda’ and can now simply be called ‘information'”.[1] Documents released reveal that NED cooperated closely with CIA propaganda initiatives. Allen Weinstein, a cofounder of NED, acknowledged: “a lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA”.[2] Philip Agee, a CIA whistle-blower, explained that NED was established as a “propaganda and inducement program” to subvert foreign nations and style it as a democracy promotion initiative. NED also finances the Norwegian Helsinki Committee.
The NGOs enable a loud Western-backed minority to marginalise a silent majority, and then sell it as “democracy”. Protests can therefore legitimise the overthrow of elected governments. The Guardian referred to the Ukrainian Orange Revolution in 2004 as “an American creation, a sophisticated and brilliantly conceived exercise in Western branding and mass marketing” for the purpose of “winning other people’s elections”.[3] Another article by the Guardian labelled the Orange Revolution as a “postmodern coup d’état” and a “CIA-sponsored third world uprising of cold war days, adapted to post-Soviet conditions”.[4] A similar regime change operation was repeated in Ukraine in 2014 to mobilise Ukrainian civil society against their government, resulting in overthrowing the democratically elected government against the will of the majority of Ukrainians. The NGOs branded it a “democratic revolution” and it was followed by Washington asserting its dominance over key levers of power in Kiev.
Similar NGO operations were also launched against Georgia. The NGOs staged Georgia’s “Rose Revolution” in 2003 which eventually resulted in war with Russia after the new authorities in Georgia attacked South Ossetia. Recently, the Prime Minister of Georgia cautioned that the US was yet again using NGOs in an effort to topple the government to use his country as a second front against Russia.[5] Georgia’s democratically elected parliament passed a law with an overwhelming majority (83 in favour vs 23 against), for greater transparency over the funding of NGOs. Unsurprisingly, the Western NGOs decided that transparency over funding of NGOs was undemocratic, and it was labelled a “Russian law”. The Western public was fed footage of protests for democratic credibility, and they were reassured that the Georgian Prime Minister was merely a Russian puppet. The US and EU subsequently responded by threatening Georgia with sanctions in the name of “supporting” Georgia’s civil society.
Civil Society Corrupted
Society rests on three legs – the government, the market and civil society. Initially, the free market was seen as the main instrument to elevate the freedom of the individual from government. Yet, as immense power concentrated in large industries in the late 19th century, some liberals looked to the government as an ally to limit the power of large businesses. The challenge of our time is that government and corporate interests go increasingly hand-in-hand, which only intensifies with the rise of the tech giants. This makes it much more difficult for civil society to operate independently. The universities should be a bastion of freedom and not policed by fake NGOs.
[1] D. Ignatius, ‘Innocence Abroad: The New World of Spyless Coups’, Washington Post, 22 September 1991.
[2] Ibid.
[3] I. Traynor, ‘US campaign behind the turmoil in Kiev’, The Guardian, 26 November 2004.
[4] J. Steele, ‘Ukraine’s postmodern coup d’état’, The Guardian, 26 November 2004.
[5] L Kelly, ‘Georgian prime minister accuses US of fueling ‘revolution attempts’’, The Hill, 3 May 2024.
