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.
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.
Landmark Ruling Strikes Down Warrantless Device Searches of US Citizens at Borders
By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | August 1, 2024
The District Court for the Eastern District of New York has ruled that the US government must reverse course on its policy of warrantless searches of US (and foreign) nationals’ electronic devices as they enter the country.
We obtained a copy of the ruling for you here.
This is not the only court decision on this issue, while this particular outcome, requiring that border agents obtain court-issued orders before performing such searches, concerns the district that is the court’s seat – therefore also a major port of entry, JFK International Airport.
It was precisely at this airport that an event unfolded which set in motion a legal case. In 2022, US citizen Kurbonali Sultanov was coerced (he was told he “had no choice”) into surrendering his phone’s passport to border officers.
Sultanov later became a defendant in a criminal case but argued that evidence from the phone should not be admitted because the device was accessed in violation of the Fourth Amendment (which protects Americans against unreasonable and warrantless searches).
Of course, all these envisaged protections refer to US citizens, and even there prove to be sketchy in many instances. Foreign travelers (even though entering the country legally) are effectively left without any protections regarding their privacy.
Sultanov’s argument was supported in an amicus brief filed the following year by the Knight First Amendment Institute and the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, who said that the First Amendment is violated as well when law enforcement gains access to phones without a warrant since it invalidates constitutional protections of speech, freedom of the press, religion, and association.
The New York Eastern District Court’s decision is by and large based precisely on that amicus brief. One of the arguments from it is that journalists entering the US are often forced to hand over their devices.
The court agreed that “letting border agents freely rifle through journalists’ work product and communications whenever they cross the border would pose an intolerable risk to press freedom,” said Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press attorney Grayson Clary in a press statement.
Meanwhile, US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) said they were reviewing this ruling – and would not comment on what the agency said are “pending criminal cases.”
Israeli police arrest Al-Aqsa Mosque preacher for mourning Haniyeh

Sheikh Ekrima Sa’id Sabri, the former grand mufti of Jerusalem and the Palestinian territories walks outside an Israeli police station after being summoned for interrogation, in Jerusalem on January 2, 2023. [Saeed Qaq/NurPhoto via Getty Images]
MEMO | August 2, 2024
Israeli police, on Friday, arrested Al-Aqsa Mosque preacher, Sheikh Ekrima Sabri, for mourning slain Hamas Political Bureau chief, Ismail Haniyeh, Anadolu Agency reports.
Haniyeh was assassinated on Wednesday in Tehran, Iran’s capital. While Hamas and Iran blamed Israel for the killing, Tel Aviv has not confirmed or denied its responsibility.
One of Sabri’s relatives told Anadolu that the Israeli police officers stormed into his home in the Occupied East Jerusalem and arrested him.
Following the Friday prayer in Al-Aqsa Mosque, Sabri led a funeral prayer in absentia for Haniyeh.
“The people of Jerusalem and the environs of Jerusalem from the pulpit of the blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque mourn the martyr Ismail Haniyeh,” he said during his sermon.
Following the sermon, the Israeli police said they were probing whether the statement constituted “incitement” and that they would act accordingly.
The 85-year-old preacher was detained multiple times by the Israeli forces in the past and was banned from entering Al-Aqsa Mosque in Occupied East Jerusalem for several months.
Sabri is a staunch critic of the decades-long Israeli Occupation of the Palestinian Territories. He had previously held the position of Mufti of Jerusalem and the Palestinian Territories from 1994 to 2006.
Disinformation Board Chief Sued Fox News For Alleging She Was Pro-Censorship. A Judge Agreed With Fox News.

By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | July 31, 2024
America’s attempt to set up what critics called the “Ministry of Truth” failed miserably last year when the Disinformation Governance Board was quickly set up as an advisory to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) – and then quickly dissolved, under massive public pushback.
The Board’s head was Nina Jankowicz, whose role some of those same critics, among politicians and media among them, summed up as “misinformation czar.”
Let’s say that this is a kind way of saying, “censorship czar.” But, reporting to this effect still personally offended Jankowicz enough to file a defamation lawsuit against Fox News.
And now, a federal judge has dismissed that suit.
We obtained a copy of the order for you here.
Jankowicz stated in the filing that Fox was making false claims about her intent to censor Americans, denying also that she “wanted to give verified Twitter users, including herself, the power to edit others tweets,” or that she was actually fired (rather than resigning).
The reason she had to leave the Board, Jankowicz asserted, was the “harassment” she endured because Fox published reports that contained those claims.
US District Court for the District of Delaware Judge Colm Connolly, however, dismissed these three arguments. Jankowicz cited 37 statements heard on Fox, but the judge said 36 of them were about the Board in general, not her in particular.
And the one instance that could be construed to refer to Jankowicz (her picture was used to illustrate a report about the Board) doesn’t count, either.
The Fox report said the Board was “dedicated to working with the special media giants for the purpose of policing information.”
The judge decided to express himself plainly: “The statement is not defamatory because it is not false.”
And he didn’t stop there: “The Board was formed precisely to police information and to work with non governmental actors,” Connolly wrote.
The fact that the Board was to “coordinate” with private companies to tackle what they identified as “misinformation”, is an objective that Connolly said is “fairly characterized as a form of censorship.”
As for the claim that Fox lied regarding the Twitter controversy, the ruling reads: “The complaint itself quotes Jankowicz confirming in a Zoom session that she endorsed the notion of having ‘verified’ individuals edit the content of others’ tweets.”
Fox commented on this outcome by saying they were satisfied that the court supported the First Amendment, while Jankowicz told her GoFundMe supporters, who are raising funds for her legal fees, that she would appeal.
The case is just one episode in the legal battles raging in the US, that fall into the broader category of “supercontroversy” that is the the Big Government-Big Tech collusion.
Missouri AG Andrew Bailey Advocates for Tech-State Separation Criticizes, Big Tech Censorship Influence
By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | July 31, 2024
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey wants First Amendment free speech protections to be bolstered and believes that the separation of Tech and State ( creating a “wall of separation” between them) is in order.
This is to make sure government censorship is efficiently prevented going forward, he suggested.
Bailey sat down with journalist Tim Pool, and went through a litany of other issues plaguing political and social democratic processes, most clearly visible in what critics of the current White House consider to be the government colluding with social media companies to suppress lawful speech.
Bailey spoke about the Missouri v. Biden case (which reached the Supreme Court as Murthy v. Missouri) to say that “government coerced censorship” has already been proven, and now that the case has been referred back to a lower court, the discovery process can be used to fully expose what the state AG called, “that vast Censorship Enterprise.”
Regarding the much contested on both sides of the aisle (but for different reasons) Section 230 of the CDA, Bailey agreed with the host that it should not continue in the current form, since platforms are protected for hosting third-party content – and then allowed to freely censor that content.
But the collusion with the government demonstrated in stark terms why Section 230 should be reformed so that it’s “just a shield” for platforms, without also putting the “sword” of censorship in their hands, the interlocutors agreed.
The issue of social media and internet services becoming so widespread they are arguably the most powerful influence on people’s choices – from shopping to politics – means they qualify as the public square.
And on that square, culture can be “fundamentally reshaped,” Bailey said. Platforms banning “misgendering speech” was mentioned as an example.
And back to Section 230, but this time with regards to Wikipedia. Here, the Missouri AG doesn’t believe immunity from the rules should extended to Wikipedia.
This is because whatever is published on Wikipedia is not clearly marked as written by users (such as on social platforms) – this is only visible in the source of a webpage.
“The byline is, ‘from Wikipedia’,” Pool remarked.
“They look like a publisher,” Bailey said, alleging that Section 230 was not designed to protect those.

