Fauci’s string of lies

Fauci presumably has good reason for such a tactic, as a number of questions have arisen regarding his actions both during the Covid crisis and prior to that. For example, the committee’s chair Senator Rand Paul published Fauci’s diary from the pandemic period prior to the hearing; entries made in early 2020 show that, in private, Fauci estimated the mortality rate of the disease to be significantly lower than he claimed whilst answering questions before the US Congress just a few weeks later.

“The stated mortality over all of this when you look at all the data including China is about three percent. It first started off as two and three,” Fauci said in a testimony before the House Oversight Committee on March 11, 2020. “I think that if you take into account all cases with minimal symptoms or no symptoms at all, the mortality rate will probably fall to around one per cent, which means it is 10 times more deadly than seasonal flu,” he said. “I think that’s something people can easily understand.”

But on Feb. 8, 2020, about a month before that congressional testimony, Fauci had privately expressed the belief that the virus’s mortality rate is much lower.

“[Former CDC Director] Tom Frieden called me this AM and we discussed various aspects of the outbreak,” Fauci wrote. “He and I are on the same page in thinking that this is acting like a bad influenza in its transmissibility and that the denominator is much greater than 34,867 (above) making the case fatality rate (CFR) more like 0.2-0.3% rather than 2.0%.”

Dangerous experiments in Wuhan

In essence, this gives grounds to believe that Fauci has lied to the Congress, which is a criminal offence.

Moreover, this is not the first time Fauci has been caught lying to the Congress. In May 2021, whilst answering questions from Senator Paul, Fauci lied about the circumstances surrounding coronavirus gain-of-function research carried out at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China, and the funding for that research. It is highly likely that the virus that caused the crisis originated from that very laboratory.

The US government has now published documents on the matter which show how the NIAID, led by Fauci, allocated millions of US taxpayers’ dollars, including approximately $600,000 via EcoHealth Alliance – an organisation that came to prominence during the Covid pandemic – so that experiments could be carried out at the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s laboratory in order to study coronaviruses derived from bats and to enhance the virulence of these viruses. Fauci essentially denied to the Congress that such experiments had ever been carried out during his supervision.

Took the Fifth 111 times: to avoid further lies

Fauci was pardoned by President Biden in January 2025, and the Trump administration has not yet charged him with any crimes. That said, if Fauci continued to lie before Congress, Biden’s pardon would not have saved him.

In total, Fauci invoked his right to refuse to answer 111 times during the hearing, citing the Fifth Amendment. As his refusal applied to every question, it led to a number of awkward situations. For example, Senator Paul drew Fauci’s attention to the fact that a folder containing documents relating to the use of the Fifth Amendment had been placed on the table in front of him, and asked if he could see it. Fauci refused to answer this question as well, invoking the provisions of the Fifth Amendment, whereupon Senator Paul asked for the following to be recorded in the minutes: “Let the record record that the witness has refused to answer whether there is a folder in front of him based on his Fifth Amendment right.”

Senator Bernie Moreno, on his part, cited a news story from six years ago: in 2020, a woman was arrested at a high school football match in Ohio for refusing to wear a mask. According to Moreno, it was precisely this kind of abuses of power during the pandemic – fuelled by Fauci’s messages – that led him to decide to sell his businesses and stand for the Senate. During the session, he asked bluntly: “Here I am, sitting in front of you six years later, saying: who the fuck do you think you were for doing that?” Moreno has now faced criticism for such somewhat uncensored language.

Senator Ron Johnson highlighted several points he would have liked to have asked of Fauci. For example, in the Covid years, Fauci spoke disparagingly about ivermectin, a drug that had been derisively dubbed ‘horse dewormer’ at the time. Johnson pointed out that whilst Fauci was publicly stating that there was no evidence that ivermectin was beneficial, a string of scientific studies had already been published showing the opposite – an effectiveness of 60–70 per cent. Johnson asked Fauci why he had sabotaged ivermectin in this way. “Did you do that because you knew that only way you get emergency use authorization for these drugs, this experimental gene therapy (referring to mRNA vaccines – HS), was if there was no effective treatment?”

In addition, Johnson, who has long advocated for the many people suffering from Covid vaccine side effects, presented statistics on them from around the world. “Currently, worldwide, there have been almost 1.7 million adverse events reported to the VAERS system. Of those, over 39,000 were deaths. And of those deaths, 24% occurred on the day of the vaccination, or within one or two days,” he explained.

As Fauci again exercised his right not to testify, he did not comment on these issues.

Share

Fauci sees himself as a victim of a witch hunt

Fauci justified his refusal to testify by stating that this was a witch-hunt organised against him, orchestrated by Senator Paul, the chair of the committee. “Given Senator Paul’s obvious obsession with calling for my prosecution, his repeated slanderous comments about me, and recently his publicly releasing my unredacted personal diary aimed at embarrassing and intimidating me, the only conclusion I can reach is that the sole reason he is calling me before this committee is to get me to say something, anything, that could vindicate his repeated public pledges that I end up, in his words, ‘behind bars,’” Fauci said before invoking the Fifth.

Paul, however, proposed that Fauci, who refused to answer the posed questions, be held in contempt of the Congress. Specifically, Paul argues that the pardon issued by Biden means Fauci cannot invoke the Fifth Amendment. Consequently, the same committee will vote next week on Fauci’s non-compliance, and if he is found in contempt, he could face a fine of up to $100,000 and up to one year in prison.

Over the past few days, the following topics attracted our attention:

• 184 Suspected Arsonists Arrested in France

• A Body of Fauci Lies

• Canada Enforces New ‘Hate Speech’ Law

184 Suspected Arsonists Arrested in France

France’s Interior Minister Laurent Nunez announced on Tuesday that an individual has been remanded in custody in connection with starting the raging wildfires in south-east France.

The minister said that since the start of summer, the internal security forces have apprehended 184 individuals and they are showing total determination to identify every arsonist: “no leniency toward those who endanger lives, expose our firefighters to risk, and destroy our heritage.”

Arrests have also been made in Spain, which suffers from equally devastating wildfires. The Civil Guard has arrested one person and is investigating another over the Burgohondo fire, which officials said could have been caused by negligence involving heavy machinery used when a period of restrictions were in place, local media reported.

The wildfires in both countries have caused extensive damage to the local population, with around 360,000 people having to be evacuated. As both countries have faced a heatwave, it has been extremely difficult for firefighters to extinguish the wildfires.

A Body of Fauci Lies

Entries from early 2020 in a now-exposed personal diary kept by Anthony Fauci during the COVID-19 pandemic show that he privately estimated the death rate from the illness was significantly lower than what he told Congress under oath only weeks later, Fox News reports.

Fauci was the director of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) during the Covid crisis and became the leading public face in the fight against Covid-19. “The stated mortality over all of this when you look at all the data including China is about three percent. It first started off as two and three,” Fauci said in testimony before the House Oversight Committee on March 11, 2020.

“I think if you count all the cases of minimally symptomatic or asymptomatic infection, that probably brings the mortality rate down to somewhere around one percent, which means it is 10 times more lethal than the seasonal flu,” Fauci continued. “I think that is something that people can get their arms around and understand.”

But on Feb. 8, 2020, about a month before that congressional testimony, Fauci expressed privately that he believed the virus’s mortality rate was much lower than what he later told lawmakers.

“[Former CDC Director] Tom Frieden called me this AM and we discussed various aspects of the outbreak,” Fauci wrote. “He and I are on the same page in thinking tht [sic] this is acting like a bad influenza in its transmissibility and that the denominator is much greater than 34,867 (above) making the case fatality rate (CFR) more like 0.2-0.3 % rather than 2.0%.”

In essence, this once again gives grounds to believe that Fauci has lied to Congress, which is a criminal offence.

This is not the first time Fauci has been caught lying to Congress. In May 2021, whilst answering questions from Senator Paul, Fauci lied about the circumstances surrounding coronavirus gain-of-function research carried out at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China, and the funding for that research. The US government has now published documents on this matter, which show how the NIAID, led by Fauci, allocated millions of US taxpayers’ dollars, including approximately $600,000 via EcoHealth Alliance – an organisation that came to prominence during the Covid pandemic – so that experiments could be carried out at the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s laboratory to study coronaviruses derived from bats and to enhance the virulence of these viruses. Fauci essentially denied before Congress that such experiments had been carried out under his supervision.

Fauci was pardoned by President Biden in January 2025, and the Trump administration has not charged him with any crimes.

Fauci will testify about these controversies before Congress today.

Share

Canada Enforces New ‘Hate Speech’ Law

Government officials in Canada are contacting people at their homes over social media posts written months or years ago, according to the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF), Reclaim The Net reports.

The legal advocacy group says the reports began arriving after Bill C-9, the Combatting Hate Act, cleared Parliament. The law received royal assent on June 18 and came into force on July 18, expanding Canada’s “hate speech” offenses, raising penalties, and eliminating defenses that had limited prosecutions for what the state calls hate-related expression.

“We are receiving reports that some Canadians are being contacted at their homes by government officials about social media posts made months or even years ago,” the JCCF wrote.

The Act makes hate-motivated crime a standalone offense and creates new charges for intimidating or obstructing people at places of worship, schools, and community centers. It also criminalizes the public display of symbols used by listed terrorist groups, two Nazi symbols, and a noose. The law defines hatred as “an emotion of an intense and extreme nature that is clearly associated with vilification and detestation.” Police and prosecutors decide which posts meet that description.

Maximum sentences for offences have been raised, ranging from two to five years for lesser offences, five to ten years for the next tier, and up to life imprisonment for the most serious hate-motivated crimes.

• British Researchers: Opposing Trans Ideology and Immigration Criticism is Misinformation

• EU Court: VPN Providers Not Liable for Copyright Infringements

• The US is Targeting Violence Perpetrated by the Far Left

British Researchers: Opposing Trans Ideology and Immigration Criticism is False or Misinformation

According to a report commissioned by the UK government, opinions opposing trans ideology and reports concerning crime committed by immigrants constitute false and misleading information. The report recommends ‘psychologically vaccinating’ the public against false information and implementing measures in schools, as well as in the wider public sphere. Critics believe this amounts to an Orwellian ‘thought police’ scheme and raises fears that any common-sense criticism could in future be labelled as false or misleading information, writes GB News.

Researchers from the Universities of Sheffield and Edinburgh published a report that identifies 11 categories of false and misleading information circulating in the UK: health, climate change, elections, immigration, security and conflict, foreign disinformation, racism, AI-generated content, gender and LGBTQ+, finance and others. The researchers drew on studies by the World Economic Forum, the UN, the British Parliament and the Communications Authority, as well as data from EU fact-checkers. They emphasised that false and misleading information does not operate in isolation but amplifies other global threats. This distorts public understanding and hinders coordinated responses. It can undermine evidence-based policy, erode public trust, destroy democracy, increase polarisation, and harm individuals, communities and society as a whole. Although propaganda and rumours are nothing new, social media has fundamentally changed how such narratives spread, and artificial intelligence is now adding fuel to the fire.

More specifically, the report identifies gender and LGBTQ+ issues as one category. False and misleading information here includes “anti-LGBTQ+ narratives, ‘gender ideology’ claims targeting schools and public institutions, Pride event misrepresentation, and transgender athlete controversies.” For example, based on the report, the reports about Imane Khelif, a boxer who competed at the 2024 Paris Olympics, who was criticised for competing in the women’s category because she had allegedly previously failed a gender verification test, would likely be automatically classified as false and misleading information.

False and misleading information in the health category includes “vaccine misinformation, COVID-19 narratives, miracle cure claims, and pandemic policy”, while climate change false and misleading information includes “climate denial, weather map manipulation, geoengineering conspiracies (including HAARP and directed energy weapons), and the misattribution of natural disasters to deliberate technological intervention”.

The immigration category comprises “false claims about migrant entitlements, misrepresentation of the demographic composition of migrant arrivals, and the misattribution of criminal acts to migrant communities”, whilst racist content includes, amongst other things, “content associating minority communities with crime or cultural threat”. Other categories include allegations of electoral fraud, war-related disinformation, claims of staged attacks, deepfakes created using artificial intelligence (primarily of a political nature), and attempts to institutionally delegitimise the EU. Finally, the last category is ‘miscellaneous’, which leaves broad scope to label other information as false or misleading.

Furthermore, the researchers believe the UK urgently needs a database of false and misleading information, updated monthly. This would monitor the spread of ‘misinformation’ and help mitigate damage from high-priority claims. Ideally, it could link to the European Digital Media Observatory (EDMO).

The report recommends that politicians use psychology to prevent the spread of potentially misleading or false information. These methods should be implemented in schools and public discourse to stop ‘false’ ideas from taking root. The authors highlight prebunking, also called ‘psychological vaccination’, as a key measure, whereby an argument is refuted before it even begins to spread or takes root. The report identifies debunking as another important measure, whereby ‘misinformation’ that has already been published is corrected and efforts are made to prevent others from believing the original information. With regard to media and digital literacy, the authors find that whilst these do build resilience, they take too much time and the training does not reach all groups. Therefore, authorities should also regulate platform structures and algorithms more closely, for example by requiring quality labels.

At present, the UK government has sought to distance itself from the report and asserts that it is an independent review which does not represent official policy. Its purpose was to provide information on identifying and combating harmful information. According to a government spokesperson, the authorities’ primary duty is to protect democracy, including freedom of speech.

Shadow Chancellor Alex Burghart has described the report as a plan to establish an “Orwellian thought police”. According to Burghart, Labour claims it is merely combating disinformation, but in reality it risks creating a thought police that could censor common-sense opinions of millions. “It comes as no surprise that a government so committed to concealment and secrecy is seeking to stifle dissent,” stated the Shadow Chancellor, warning that the proposals could restrict activists campaigning for women’s rights and others. Burghart is calling on the new British Prime Minister, Keir Starmer’s successor or relevant leadership, to disregard the report.

Share

EU Court: VPN Providers Not Liable for Copyright Infringements

The Court of Justice of the European Union handed down a judgment in July 2026 in the case concerning the publication of Anne Frank’s manuscripts, concluding that VPN service providers are not liable for copyright infringements. The Court recognised VPNs as legitimate technical tools and set limits on online copyright disputes, Techradar reports.

The Court ruled in a legal dispute over the online publication of Anne Frank’s historical manuscripts. This began when the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences and the Society for the Study and Appreciation of Historical Texts published a digital scholarly Dutch-language edition of Anne Frank’s diary on the website www.annefrankmanuscripten.org. The domain is owned by an association registered in Belgium. Access is restricted by geo-blocking, which prevents users in countries where the work is still protected by copyright from viewing the site, including the Netherlands, where some texts are protected until 2037. In Belgium and around 60 other countries, Frank’s writings have been in the public domain for many years.

The Anne Frank Fonds, the copyright holder, brought a claim, arguing that VPNs enable users to conceal their IP address and appear to be in Belgium. This allowed Dutch readers to access a work still protected by copyright in the Netherlands without authorisation. And by that the publishers had distributed the protected work.

The court addressed whether a publisher that uses geo-blocking on its website breaks the law if users from blocked countries bypass it with a VPN. The court found that the publisher was not in breach of the law. As long as the website employs state-of-the-art geo-blocking technology, the publisher cannot be held liable for copyright infringement solely because readers use a VPN to circumvent the block. The court noted that, although circumvention is possible, this possibility cannot automatically be a decisive factor in determining the inadequacy of the website’s measures. Furthermore, the court stated that providers of VPNs or similar services are not liable for users circumventing restrictions.

The ruling sets a precedent, confirming that copyright holders cannot claim a website’s security measures are ineffective simply because VPNs exist. It also clarifies that such privacy software is lawful. Consumers are entitled to use a VPN to encrypt their internet traffic or conceal their IP address. Indirectly, the judges protected VPN companies from potential damages in future piracy cases.

Anne Frank was a German teenager of Jewish descent who lived in the Netherlands and kept a diary (‘The Diary of Anne Frank’) between 1942 and 1944, in which she bore witness to the Holocaust. When Anne died in a concentration camp, her father, Otto Frank, published her writings in 1947 and founded the Anne Frank Foundation in 1963. Following Otto Frank’s death, the Anne Frank Foundation acquired the copyright to the works.

Subscribe now

The US is Targeting Violence Perpetrated by the Far Left

In July, the Trump administration hosted representatives from more than 60 countries in Washington, calling on nations to join forces in combating left-wing extremism, whose organised acts of terrorism are increasing year on year on both sides of the Atlantic. According to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, far-left extremism is nothing new but has long been the dominant form of political violence. It stems from a unique form of evil rooted in a deep hatred of civilisation, reports the BBC.

Foreign Minister Rubio emphasised in his speech: “For far too long, however, our counter-terrorism doctrine has had a blind spot – a blind spot when it comes to extremist violence from the political left. Even today, the very idea that far-left terrorism could be a serious threat is treated as a right-wing fever dream, or worse, as a dangerous fascist conspiracy.” According to Rubio, left-wing terrorism has been a constant feature throughout history and is certainly not a figment of conservative politicians’ imagination, but rather an ever-growing real threat. “This is a distinctive and unique evil. It has always been driven by hatred above all else – hatred for civilisation itself,” said Rubio, describing the far left as a rebellion against the best, a rebellion of the weak and the cowardly against the strong and the good. The instigators are often those who are incapable of building, creating or achieving anything of significance, and who therefore take their revenge on the world. “This is what radical leftism is. It may take on various different slogans and ideologies across different places and times. They may call themselves anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist, communist, anarchist or Marxist. But the fundamental character is always the same. It’s always the same,” Rubio emphasised, adding that such toxic hatred is masked by talk of equality, justice and liberation.

The Foreign Minister warned that left-wing terrorism has reached a level not seen for decades. According to US data, in 2025 far-left extremists were responsible for a significant share of recorded anti-government attacks or plots. In 2024, 21 attacks were recorded in the European Union linked to far-left and anarchist terrorists. In the same year, 24 jihadist attacks were recorded. In 2025, 12 of the 45 recorded terrorist attacks in the EU were linked to far-left and anarchist activists.

Rubio described the transnational nature of far-left movements, in which Antifa members, for example, travel around the world to take part in each other’s attacks, spread propaganda and organise training. New members are recruited from various sources, and information on targets is exchanged via encrypted channels. Accordingly, in Rubio’s view, there is no alternative but for countries to act in cooperation and collectively.

Stephen Miller, Deputy Chief of Staff and National Security Adviser at the White House, characterised left-wingers as people driven, in essence, by envy, hatred and jealousy. Miller described: “One of the hallmarks of left-wing violence and terrorism is its completely pretextual and disingenuous appeal to civil liberties in an effort to shield its own violence. This is the tactic the left always uses to try to protect itself from facing criminal punishment.” According to Miller, a left-winger who does not actually believe in freedom, civil rights or any conventional concept of justice is lying when they claim their rights are being violated. Consequently, the US has begun taking steps to recognise left-wing violence as a form of political terrorism that directly threatens national security, and there is no turning back.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced plans to increase funding for this fight and to identify organisations that abuse charitable and non-profit structures as means of illegal financing. He promised to investigate the tax exemptions and financial channels of such organisations and confirmed that the systems and networks supporting left-wing terrorism would be dismantled.

According to a White House press release, the aim of the conference was to launch an international campaign against radical left-wing terrorism, which must be treated with the same severity as jihadist terrorism. The fight against left-wing groups, particularly Antifa, has been a priority for the Trump administration for some time. Last September, Trump designated Antifa as a domestic terrorist organisation, which, according to the designation, is a militaristic and anarchist enterprise. Its aim is to overthrow the government, law enforcement agencies and the legal system through the use of (political) violence, acts of terror, riots and attacks on the police. The US has taken a stand against Antifa through both campaigns and concrete measures. According to the authorities, the aim is to dismantle left-wing terrorism, cut off funding, shut down members’ hideouts and propaganda channels, and bring the perpetrators to justice. In addition to a domestic Antifa cell, Washington has also designated four European groups as terrorist organisations: Antifa Ost (Germany), the Informal Anarchist Federation/International Revolutionary Front (Italy), Armed Proletarian Justice (Greece) and Revolutionary Class Self-Defence (Greece).

Following the conference, the State Department also announced new visa restrictions applicable to members of far-left terrorist and associated groups, including foreign nationals who have funded, encouraged or supported far-left extremists.

These quotes highlight:
- the value of various individual freedoms, including freedom of speech and thought, academic freedom, freedom over one’s personal way of life, etc.
- the importance of value-based governance, and the dangers and harm of corrupt practices.

1. David Hume, philosopher (1711-1778)

   

2. Thomas Paine, political philosopher (1737-1809)

   

3. Adam Smith, philosopher, and political economist (1723-1790)

   

• Germany Expands Federal Police Powers: AI Surveillance, Facial Recognition, and Drones

• Ofcom Has Placed iMessage and Messenger Under Scrutiny

• Russian Anti-War Activist Deported from Turkey Arrested in Moscow

Germany Expands Federal Police Powers: AI Surveillance, Facial Recognition, and Drones

Last week, the German Bundestag approved a new law granting the federal police a range of new powers. The police will be authorized to use drones, artificial intelligence, and enhanced surveillance of telecommunications. The law also makes it easier to detain immigrants awaiting deportation, according to Deutsche Welle.

According to the government, the new federal police law was urgently needed to keep pace with technological developments and evolving threats to public security.

Under the new Federal Police Act, the Federal Police may use AI-supported facial recognition in public places under their jurisdiction, such as airports and train stations. The AI is also permitted to assess behavior - for example, detecting threatening or conspicuous actions in a crowd and alerting officers.

In addition, the new law grants the police greater authority to use surveillance software on end-user devices for “preventative surveillance.” It also authorizes drone use in high-traffic areas like train stations and near borders. The law further details responses to threatening unmanned aerial vehicles, allowing signal blockers, electromagnetic pulses, and even firearms, allegedly, only as a last resort.

During a Bundestag debate, opposition parties criticized the use of facial recognition with behavioral analysis. “Imagine this: Your train is two hours late ... and you’re angry, pacing back and forth on the platform in frustration. To the AI, this is a ‘suspicious lingering behavior.’ It thinks you’re a pickpocket,” said Clara Bünger of the Left Party. She described the law as a step toward authoritarianism and a surveillance state that weakens fundamental rights.

Michael Kolain, Head of Policy at the Center for Digital Rights and Democracy, called the measures controversial. He warned that facial recognition creates infrastructure for mass surveillance and suspends anonymity in public spaces. On “preventative surveillance,” he noted the risk of sensitive personal data reaching security forces - “like they can read your diary” in the worst case. Critics argue that by allowing for “more effective” monitoring of online communications, the Federal Police could likely deploy technologies and databases nationwide that until now have been used only in individual operations or, to a limited extent, by police units in certain federal states. “These are measures that we know from China, from Iran, from Russia, but which are extremely unusual for German circumstances,” Kolain stated.

Human rights organizations are concerned that the law gives the federal police more powers to detain immigrants due for deportation and conduct random searches. Amnesty International’s statement warns these provisions provide a gateway for racial profiling. According to Julia Duchrow, Secretary General of Amnesty International Germany, there is a growing dangerous imbalance: police powers of control and surveillance are expanding, while transparency, accountability, and data protections lag or are even rolled back

Human rights and digital rights groups assess that the new law poses significant risks to democratic freedoms and is likely to face challenges before Germany’s Constitutional Court. However, such proceedings can take years, allowing the federal police to implement the law in the meantime.

Share

Ofcom Has Placed iMessage and Messenger Under Scrutiny

The UK communications regulator Ofcom has decided to place the world’s two most popular messaging apps - Apple’s iMessage and Meta’s Messenger - under scrutiny.
They have now been designated as emerging Category 1 services, which could quickly lead to reclassification as full Category 1 services. This would require them to comply with identity verification and other strict obligations, reports Reclaim The Net.

The UK’s Online Safety Act classifies online services into tiers, with Category 1 being the highest. This tier includes major platforms that must follow the strictest rules. Currently, there are 11 platforms on this list: Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest, Quora, Reddit, Roblox, Snapchat, TikTok, WhatsApp, X, and YouTube. But for platforms like Apple’s iMessage and Meta’s Messenger Ofcom has created a separate list of emerging Category 1 services that includes also Threads, and Wikipedia. These are “new services” very close to meeting the full Category 1 threshold.

According to Ofcom, an emerging Category 1 service does not need to be similar to a full Category 1 service. It can qualify based largely on user numbers, even if other required features are missing. Critics argue that Ofcom is labeling services as “emerging” Category 1 even when they lack the characteristics that would justify full classification.

The requirements for Category 1 services are strict. Such platforms must offer users “voluntary” identity verification. At the same time, platforms have the option to block anyone who has not verified their identity. For example, Wikipedia editors could block all unverified authors, effectively turning voluntary verification into mandatory. Such “voluntary” compulsion can be implemented across web services.

In addition, Category 1 platforms must assess the likelihood that an adult user will encounter content that, while legal, is officially undesirable. This includes material offensive on the basis of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, disability, or gender identity, as well as content that incites hatred against people in those groups. Platforms must also implement “voluntary measures” to filter such content, improve complaint systems, enforce terms of service, and publish assessments of how these mechanisms impact users’ freedom of speech and privacy.

Largely due to such categories, Wikipedia took Ofcom to court last year, warning against the broad definitions in the Online Safety Act that could cover the non-profit encyclopedia. In August, the High Court dismissed the appeal but left open the possibility for Wikipedia to return court if Ofcom “(impermissibly) concludes that Wikipedia is a Category 1 service.” The court added that the ruling does not give Ofcom or the Secretary of State the green light to implement regulations that would significantly impede Wikipedia’s operations. Now, however, Ofcom has devised a new list - the “emerging Category 1 services” - which includes Wikipedia as well as iMessage and Messenger. A service can be moved to the full Category 1 list with relative ease.

Subscribe now

Russian Anti-War Activist Deported from Turkey Arrested in Moscow

Turkey deported Ariadna Litvinova (24), who was wanted in Russia, where authorities accuse her of discrediting the military. The charges stem from her writing “Murderers! Peace to Ukraine!” and “Freedom for political prisoners” on banners during a pro-war exhibition in St. Petersburg in February 2025. She now faces up to seven years in prison, according to The Moscow Times.

Russian authorities first detained Ariadna Litvinova in February 2025 for these anti-war statements. She was sentenced to an administrative fine of 50,000 rubles (about €570) for discrediting the military and was sent to pretrial detention on charges of vandalism motivated by political hatred. In March 2025, the court changed the measure to a ban on certain activities, but no travel ban was imposed, and Litvinova managed to flee to Turkey, where her father lives. Later, the authorities reclassified her actions as a criminal offense of repeated discrediting of the armed forces combined with causing property damage. In February 2026, the court replaced her restrictions with an arrest warrant, and she was placed on an international wanted list.

In July 2026, Turkey decided on its own initiative to deport Litvinova. The official reason was that she had exceeded the permitted duration of her visa-free stay and failed to obtain a residence permit. Ankara transported her to Moscow’s Vnukovo Airport, where, according to her representative, she was immediately detained. Litvinova now faces up to seven years in prison. According to her lawyer, all contact with her has been cut off, but she was expected to be transferred to St. Petersburg.

According to the human rights organization Memorial, Litvinova’s case is clearly politically motivated unlawful persecution. The provisions on “repeated discrediting of the armed forces” used against her contradict the Constitution and international principles, and such laws have been created to silence critics of the government. Other countries have also begun deporting Russian critics and anti-war activists. For example, Kazakhstan has granted at least four requests from Moscow this year. According to human rights lawyers, deportation is increasingly becoming a tool to repress Russian anti-war activists living abroad. Unlike formal extradition, deportation does not require lengthy legal proceedings, and countries can invoke sovereignty as justification. It is also harder to determine whether there was behind-the-scenes cooperation.

These quotes highlight:
- the value of various individual freedoms, including freedom of speech and thought, academic freedom, freedom over one’s personal way of life, etc.
- the importance of value-based governance, and the dangers and harm of corrupt practices.

1. Edmund Burke, statesman, and philosopher (1729-1797)

   

2. Publius Cornelius Tacitus, Roman historian and politician (c. 56 - c. 120)

   

3. Ronald Reagan, 40th president of the United States (1911-2004)

• Brussels Calls for Phased Social Media Ban

• U.S. Health Secretary to List COVID Vaccine Harms

• Russia Forces Hotels to Use the State-Backed App Max

Brussels Calls for Phased Social Media Ban

The European Commission’s special panel has completed a report on protecting children online and establishing a new standard in the digital world. The report recommends a phased approach to digital childhood, in which children under 13 would not have independent access to social media+, with greater autonomy granted as they grow older. The report also emphasizes holding technology companies accountable for making their services safer for minors, according to EU Perspectives.

Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said at a press conference on Monday: “This report comes during a unique window of opportunity. We have heard from parents, educators, experts, and young people themselves. We have heard the experience from partners like Australia, as well as our Member States. Now we need action at European level,” she said, adding that the Commission will carefully review the report and present proposals this fall on how to ensure age-appropriate access to social media+.

More specifically, the report recommends avoiding all types of screens from birth until age 2. Children aged 3 to 5 should use digital devices only for limited periods with an adult present to ensure age-appropriate content. Children aged 6 to 9 should use social media and video games only with parental consent and supervision, with time limits and age-appropriate content. The same applies to ages 10–12, but the report notes this group is particularly vulnerable as online participation grows socially important. In summary, children under 13 should not have independent access to social media+.

Starting at age 13, children would gradually gain more independence, with direct parental control decreasing. Guidance, dialogue, media literacy, and safer platform design become key. Young people aged 16–18 should use age-appropriate digital services more independently but still need guidance, support, and complaint mechanisms. Full digital independence comes at 18.

The report therefore recommends establishing age restrictions and calls for the safe design of online services. It calls for greater attention to harmful features like infinite scrolling, autoplay, push notifications, and problematic personalized recommendations. It is worth noting that the report addresses the online environment much more broadly than just social media refers to it as “social media+.” The latter covers social media and other digital services that, according to the report, may expose minors to inappropriate content, such as app stores, video platforms, video games, and artificial intelligence.

Von der Leyen presented the report as urgent, noting that young people in Europe spend hours a day on screens. Consequences include sleep disorders, depression, anxiety, cyberbullying, and exposure to harmful material. “It is clear we need age-appropriate restrictions to platforms. This is not about whether children can access social media. It is about whether and when social media can access our children,” she emphasized, explaining that Europe believes children are raised by parents, not algorithms. “To that end, let me be very clear: social media is not a toy. While ultimately it is up to parents to decide when children get their first smartphones, what we already have is a consensus that there needs to be a start date for the age children can join social media,” she noted.

Based on the report, the European Commission hopes to draft common EU-wide rules for a social media minimum age applicable to all member states, which have so far taken varied approaches. France has set the limit at 15, Greece plans restrictions under 15, and Denmark is considering a higher limit with possible parental exceptions. Restrictions are also under consideration in Germany, Austria, Sweden, Spain, and parts of Belgium.

At the same time, critics of age verification and many others (see here, here, here, here, here) have emphasized that if the system requires every European to upload a passport, ID card, or facial scan to multiple private companies, it creates serious privacy and security risks, killing anonymity online. Social media platforms would gain even more information about every European user. According to the report, platforms should not require identity documents or biometric data; instead, a solution should be found that allows age to be verified without disclosing one’s identity or exact date of birth. According to the European Commission, such a solution is the age verification application developed by the Commission, which, however, was hacked within the first few minutes of use.

Share

U.S. Health Secretary to List COVID Vaccine Harms

U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. plans to compile a list of health damages caused by COVID-19 vaccines. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who recently terminated the emergency use authorizations for COVID-19 vaccines, is authorized under related provisions to provide compensation for vaccine-related injuries. Now, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) plans to compile a table listing health damages presumed to be caused by COVID-19 countermeasures (such as vaccines) if they occur within a specific timeframe after administration, writes The Epoch Times.

According to HHS, the government would pay compensation for the listed injuries. The table would simplify the claims process, and the ministry hopes it will also reduce the burden of proof for affected individuals. Groups representing people who have suffered health damage from the COVID-19 vaccines doubt whether the list will help those whose compensation claims have been rejected. Vaccine advocates, however, fear that the list will be misused to claim it constitutes proof of a causal link.

Dr. Joel Wallskog, co-director of React19 - an organization supporting people who have suffered health damage - who himself suffers from COVID-19 vaccine-related issues, doubts that such a list would significantly improve the situation. In Wallskog’s assessment, the list may only slightly simplify the process for a relatively small number of people whose injuries, primarily anaphylaxis and myocarditis/pericarditis, are already recognized. However, for those whose claims have been rejected, little is likely to change. Despite this, data from associations representing vaccine-injured individuals, including React19, point to evidence linking other health problems to the vaccines.

Vaccine advocates have also responded. According to Richard Hughes IV, former head of Moderna and an advocate for the American Academy of Pediatrics, the key question is whether the list will spread even more misinformation. Hughes expressed concern that the secretary might add “more speculative or poorly substantiated health conditions” to the list. For example, if it included certain neurological syndromes, POTS/dysautonomia, chronic fatigue syndromes, autoimmune diseases, or theories of sudden cardiac death, it could be used to claim that the government has confirmed a causal link. Note that Hughes also represents organizations that sued the government over changes to the mandatory childhood vaccination schedule.

According to a 2024 report by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, COVID-19 vaccines administered in the U.S. cause myocarditis and shoulder injuries, but evidence is inadequate to definitively link many other health issues to the vaccines. As a result, only around 60 claims for health damage caused by COVID-19 vaccines have been compensated in the U.S. so far (figures vary slightly by reporting date). Almost all involved myocarditis following vaccination. The average compensation has been modest (around $4,000/€3,500), though a few larger payments exist and approximately 99% of claims have been denied.

Subscribe now

Russia Forces Hotels to Use the State-Backed App Max

Russian authorities have ordered hotels to use the state-backed Max app when registering guests. In hotels, the requirement takes effect in September. This will likely not be the last sector where Max becomes mandatory, according to The Moscow Times.

The requirement applies to hotels with more than 50 rooms, which must acquire the necessary hardware and train their staff before September 1. It is based on rules introduced on April 1, which allow Russian citizens to check into a hotel using not only a passport but also a driver’s license, biometric data, or the state service portal Gosuslugi. Foreigners must present a physical passport when checking into a hotel. If a guest lacks documents, this does not exempt them from using Max. “I would like to remind you that starting September 1 of this year, if a registered guest does not have a passport, foreign passport, or driver’s license with them, you are required to register them using Max,” emphasized Minister of Economic Development Maxim Reshetnikov.

This is yet another push by the Russian government to adopt Max in as many sectors as possible. The Kremlin’s long-term plan is to turn Max into a super-app that combines private messaging, digital payments, government services, and more. The messaging app Max began to be aggressively promoted in Russia last year, when the Kremlin endorsed it as an alternative to popular messaging apps such as WhatsApp and Telegram. Citizens were persuaded to use Max through both threats and direct coercion, as well as by restricting the functionality of other apps. Now, Max is required to be pre-installed on all smart devices. As a result, users are increasingly forced to adopt Max, as an increasing number of services require it - including government services, education, finance, healthcare, and even transportation, and now hotels.

However, Max has been dogged by a reputation as a surveillance tool from the very beginning. According to critics, the app allows for the surveillance of users; it shares user data, including IP addresses and activity logs, with third parties and government agencies, and all activity within the app is essentially under the watchful eye of the Federal Security Service (FSB).

According to Europol, 76% of the 821 threatening gangs identified last year are no longer on the list of active gangs, and many have been dismantled. Nevertheless, 198 of the major gangs from the remain active, demonstrating the networks’ ability to adapt, recover, and find new opportunities. Europol assesses these “persistent” networks as more structured than others and describes them as mafia-like. These networks are larger, geographically more widespread, and have been operating for decades. As examples of such “persistent networks,” Europol cites motorcycle gangs and Latin American cartels. “Criminal markets persist. New actors emerge. Criminal profits continue to fuel activities that undermine our security, prosperity and trust in institutions,” stated Jürgen Ebner, Acting Executive Director of Europol.

However, in addition to these “persistent networks,” Europol has identified 533 entirely new networks that have sprung up to replace those that were rapidly dismantled. In total, there are 731 networks active now in the EU, with more than 400,000 members combined between them. Moreover, the number of members has increased many times over compared to the year before last, which is primarily due to a few extremely large networks, with more than 100,000 members each, that are most active in cyberattacks and online fraud.

Among the hundreds of thousands of members, 118 nationalities are represented – 6 more than last year – accounting for 60% of the world’s nationalities. Nearly two-thirds (63%) of the groups have members of mixed nationality, highlighting the cross-border character of these networks. About one third (37%) of the networks consist of members of the same nationality, whether these be citizens of an EU country or from outside the EU.

Most networks focus on a single “area,” but 23% operate on multiple “fronts”

According to Europol, the current most threatening criminal networks engage in a wide range of criminal activities: 36.3% are involved in drug trafficking, 23.3% in poly-criminality, 16.4% focus on (online) fraud, 7.9% on organized property crime, 3.7% on migrant smuggling, 2.6% on money laundering, 2.6% on human trafficking, 1.9% on cyberattacks, 1% on firearms, 0.8% on extortion, 0.5% on environmental crime, 0.5% on counterfeiting, 0.3% on child sexual exploitation, and 2.2% on other activities. Most networks (77%) specialize in a single area, with drug trafficking remaining the most “popular.” The latter market is dominated by cocaine and synthetic drugs, and one in five of the most threatening criminal networks in this field is linked to Latin America. For example, the Colombia Cartel, which had ties to the Colombian drug cartel Clan del Golfo, coordinated the cocaine trade from South America to Europe. To do so, the drugs were transported by speedboats from Colombia to neighboring countries and from there onward to Europe. The Colombia Cartel collaborated with several groups in South America and Europe, controlling the entire production and supply chain.

The second most common area of activity is fraud – both online and offline – which accounts for 16% of all the networks. The third most common set of felonies, according to Europol, are property crimes, migrant smuggling, and human trafficking. For example, Europol mentions a Chinese human trafficking network that primarily “exploited” Chinese women around certain hubs in China, Spain, and France. While some of the recruited women were aware of the sexual nature of the work, they were not informed of the working conditions beforehand. Many, however, were also deceived or forced to provide such services. The network also recruited Chinese women living in Europe and it had been active for several years.

Share

Europol is aware of 51 groups engaged in online fraud. These groups generate substantial profits, having recruited the largest number of members while targeting private individuals, companies, and government agencies. These networks are capable of operating from anywhere in the world, but the regions of origin at the forefront of it include Eastern Europe, West Africa, Southeast Asia, and the Middle East.

Beyond these areas of crime, the networks are constantly searching for vulnerabilities in societies, economies, and technologies. At the same time, digitalization, technological innovations, international trade, geopolitical unrest, and the increasing overlap between the legal and illegal economies offer these networks incredible opportunities. Criminals are eagerly exploiting digitalization and technology – such as online platforms, encrypted messaging, and artificial intelligence – to expand their operations and minimize risks. Crimes are fuelled by the opportunities of the internet and accelerated by AI and technology. They are also supported by substantial funding, sophisticated new methods, and high-level corruption.

Organized crime networks operate under the guise of legitimate businesses

Read more

• European Parliament Brings Back Chat Control Message Scanning

• U.S. Appoints Matthew Wielicki to Head U.S. Global Change Research Program

• Comedy Writer Graham Linehan Receives Compensation from Police

Parliament Brings Back Chat Control Message Scanning

Members of the European Parliament used a procedural maneuver this week to reintroduce a message filtering measure onto the plenary session’s agenda - a measure the Parliament had rejected as recently as March. Although a majority of MEPs voted against it (314 against, 276 in favor, 17 abstentions), the absolute majority (361 votes) required to reject it under second-reading rules was not reached. This means the measure was approved, writes Patrick Breyer.

Parliament did support an exception for encrypted communications, although service providers reportedly do not scan these messages anyway, making this more of a symbolic gesture. A majority was also not reached on the demand to limit message scanning solely to suspects identified by the judicial system, although there were more votes in favor than against on this issue as well (322 in favor, 255 against).

According to civil rights activist and former Member of the European Parliament Patrick Breyer, it is a true farce that the European Parliament agreed to a measure that the majority of MEPs voted against. “Our children are the real losers in this undemocratic process. The passage of a genuine, permanent child protection regulation is now in serious jeopardy. The Council will never agree to a desperately needed paradigm shift as long as they can simply stick to the old approach of suspicionless scanning at the whim of the tech industry,” writes Breyer.

The temporary measure approved by Parliament, which allows private messages to be scanned to find child sexual abuse material, will remain in effect until 2028 or until an agreement on a permanent regulation is reached. Although Parliament has dealt a significant blow to message privacy with this measure, the fight is far from over. Negotiations on a permanent version of message monitoring (Chat Control 2.0) are continuing. The main point of contention between the Commission, Parliament, and member states remains whether messages should be scanned indiscriminately or limited to those under suspicion. “The resistance we saw in Parliament today was so strong that finding a majority for permanent, suspicionless mass scanning in future negotiations is a complete pipe dream,” Breyer stated.

For now, however, U.S. tech companies can once again legally monitor everyone’s private conversations, report them to the authorities, and take action. Without the need for any suspicion, let alone a warrant or court order. This primarily affects messages on platforms such as Instagram, Discord, Snapchat, and Xbox, as well as emails sent via Gmail and Apple’s iCloud.

Share

Trump Appoints Matthew Wielicki to Head U.S. Global Change Research Program

Last year, the Trump administration largely dismantled the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP), which coordinated federal research on how climate change affects the country and produced related assessments. Now the program has been reestablished with Matthew Wielicki, a former geochemist at the University of Alabama, as its head. Wielicki has critiqued aspects of mainstream climate research, described climate issues realistically, and refers to himself as a “professor in exile,” according to Politico.

“For too long, the USGCRP has been used as a vehicle for political agendas instead of sound science,” a White House spokesperson said. “We look forward to restoring the USGCRP and ensuring it fulfills its legal mandate.”

Energy Secretary Chris Wright posted on X that “Matt Weilicki is an honest scientist who follows the data wherever it leads. That is what science is all about.” He added that too many climate scientists have focused on fear rather than data - a point he argued has misled many, including journalists at Politico. Wright hopes future climate policy will be guided by empirical data rather than rhetoric, emphasizing affordable energy over alarmism.

It is worth noting that the Politico article (by Scott Waldman) was highly critical of Wielicki. The piece describes him as a climate skeptic, argues he has drawn wrong conclusions, and highlights his view that much climate research amounts to “stamp collecting”. It also notes that allegedly left higher education of his own accord due to DEI initiatives and appears frequently in conservative media.

Although Wielicki has not posted a direct response to the Politico article, he has politely replied to Dr. Michael Mann regarding the piece and said: “If your science is as solid as you claim, why fear someone who wants to scrutinize the evidence, improve transparency, and welcome debate? Science advances through questioning... not by protecting narratives.”

Dr. Matthew Wielicki has also given interview to Freedom Research, confirming there is no evidence of a climate crisis. Instead, he worries about young people whose futures are burdened by constant climate scaremongering. This prompted him to examine the data publicly. Wielicki argues current climate science relies too heavily on models that have sometimes overstated warming. He emphasizes adaptation, affordable reliable energy, and preparation rather than pretending CO₂ reductions will stop all climate change.

Subscribe now

Comedy Writer Graham Linehan Receives Compensation from Police

Last fall, British police arrested comedy writer Graham Linehan over three social media posts in which he expressed his views on trans ideology. The writer has now been awarded tens of thousands of pounds in compensation due to shortcomings in the investigation, according to Mirror.

Graham Linehan, co-creator of the series “Father Ted,” was arrested at Heathrow Airport on suspicion of inciting violence after a trans activist filed a complaint. At the time, he was released on bail; according to Linehan, one key condition was that he could not use social media platform X - in other words, he was effectively gagged. However, in October, it was announced that no further action would be taken.

Linehan then filed a lawsuit against the Metropolitan Police (Scotland Yard) with the support of the Free Speech Union. The author based his complaint on unlawful arrest and a violation of his freedom of speech.

Just a few weeks ago, Scotland Yard apologized to Linehan and agreed to pay him £25,000 (ca. €28,900) in compensation. The police said that, although all officers acted in good faith at all times and did their best, shortcomings were identified in the investigation, the arrest, and the bail conditions.

Toby Young, Director of the Free Speech Union, said that Linehan is by no means the only person his organization has assisted in cases where the police arrested an individual over a social media post, then refrained from taking further action, and ultimately paid compensation

These quotes highlight:
- the value of various individual freedoms, including freedom of speech and thought, academic freedom, freedom over one’s personal way of life, etc.
- the importance of value-based governance, and the dangers and harm of corrupt practices.

1. Thomas Paine, political philosopher (1737-1809)

   

2. C.S. Lewis, writer (1898–1963)

   

3. Lord Acton, historian, and politician (1834-1902)

   

• European Parliament Takes Up Chat Control Again

• Germany Restricts Access to Public Information

• Dutch Wind Farm Shuts Down 20 Turbines After Young Sea Eagle Killed

European Parliament Takes Up Chat Control Again

The European Parliament will once again vote this Thursday on a draft
proposal on the Chat Control bill that would allow tech companies to scan the messages of all Europeans, including potentially encrypted ones. Critics argue that such blanket scanning infringes on the privacy of all citizens, reports Euronews.

Yesterday (7 July), the European Parliament approved the request to process the Chat Control proposal under the urgent procedure. As a result, the draft will be voted on during the plenary session this Thursday - the last session before the summer recess. Unless an overwhelming majority of Parliament (at least 361 votes) votes against the draft, the text will be deemed adopted. This would extend message monitoring until 2028, giving technology companies the opportunity once again to scan messages sent by all Europeans without restrictions.

The EU introduced a temporary message monitoring measure in 2021 to combat child sexual abuse material (CSAM) online. The measure was intended to remain in effect only until a permanent law was adopted. However, the temporary legislation contains a controversial provision that allows large technology companies to scan people’s private texts and images to detect CSAM or potential child grooming. The temporary measure expired on 3 April 2026, although the European Commission had proposed a temporary extension. The European Parliament did not approve the solution but demanded amendments so that, in the case of private conversations, the scope would be limited to individuals suspected of criminal offenses and so that the automatic screening of unknown photos and chat histories using artificial intelligence would be excluded. Thus, while the Parliament did not directly reject message monitoring, it did seek to limit its scope.

The European People’s Party (EPP), the largest political group in the European Parliament, appears to have made it a priority to push through the extension of the regulation one way or another. This is despite the fact that many EPP members voted against the draft regulation in the spring. As early as 17 June, the EPP asked European Parliament President Roberta Metsola to continue the proceedings on the temporary measure. Metsola called on EU leaders to move forward with the draft, and last week, member states agreed to the temporary reinstatement of Chat Control. EPP Group leader Manfred Weber has now placed the draft bill on the Parliament’s agenda, but this version does not incorporate any of the amendments that Parliament had demanded as recently as this spring. Moreover, the EPP has this time resorted to a rarely used special procedure, submitting the original version to Parliament and requesting an accelerated procedure.

Under normal procedural rules, a draft text is adopted if an absolute majority of Members of the European Parliament - that is, at least 361 members - do not reject or amend it. However, if Parliament rejects the text, the Council will typically not proceed with it, and the text should be referred back to the European Commission. Now, however, there is a push to hold a plenary vote in Parliament without the Commission having amended the original text. That is, to vote again on the same version that was before Parliament this spring. Markéta Gregorová, a member of the Greens/EFA group, calls this procedure undemocratic and an attempt by the EPP to impose its priorities. According to Patrick Breyer, a former Member of the European Parliament and opponent of data surveillance, this is a procedural trick, the likelihood of success of which is increased by the upcoming recess and the resulting low attendance at sessions.

The conservative EPP group, however, justifies the requested fast-track procedure by arguing that, in the group’s view, there has been a massive legal loophole regarding the sexual abuse of children online since April. “We cannot accept this legal vacuum. We cannot let child abuse material go unnoticed and unreported, day after day,” the EPP states in its post.

Share

Germany Restricts Access to Public Information

The German government has decided to decided to amend country’s Freedom of Information Act and plans to restrict public access to documents held by federal authorities and state agencies. Under the plan, individuals would have to demonstrate a “legitimate interest,” although this term is defined rather vaguely. But authorities would gain broad discretion to reject requests, writes Human Rights Watch.

Non-EU citizens, however, would not be entitled to request public documents at all, regardless of their ability to demonstrate a legitimate interest. The draft also proposes limiting access to private individuals (natural persons) only, which would prevent civil society organizations and the media from submitting requests in their own name. Furthermore, there are plans to raise the upper limit on fees for information requests, which currently stands at €500. This could deter many people who cannot afford potentially much higher costs reaching thousands of euros.

Currently, anyone in Germany can request documents from the government and other public authorities through the freedom of information process. Investigations by civil society and the media rely heavily on this opportunity, and in the past it has led to the exposure of numerous political and corruption scandals, including some involving officials of the current government - who are now determined to change the system. Last year, the ruling parties agreed in their coalition agreement to reform freedom of information, with the stated aim of providing “added value to citizens and administrative agencies.”

Almaz Teffera, senior researcher for Human Rights Watch in Europe, explained: “The German government seems to perceive transparency and freedom of information as threats and an administrative burden instead of essential safeguards in a democracy.” According to Teffera, restricting access to public documents deprives everyone of the opportunity to obtain information, makes it more difficult to hold officials accountable, and increases public distrust. Human Rights Watch is convinced that the current plan violates not only the government’s own commitments but also international law and European human rights standards. “The German government should reverse course on this dangerous pursuit to gut Germany’s Freedom of Information Act and preserve meaningful access to official records for individuals and organizations alike,” Teffera added.

FragDenStaat, a German civil society platform for freedom of information, called the plans “the most serious attack on state transparency in the history of the Federal Republic [of Germany].” Reporters Without Borders and German journalists’ networks have also criticized the plan, arguing that the government’s proposal hinders journalists’ access to information. According to these organizations, the authorities are attempting to limit the media’s ability to hold them accountable, as restricting access to public information makes the media’s work significantly more difficult.

The European Court of Human Rights has recognized that access to information is particularly important for journalists, civil society organizations, and others who monitor public life. However, this work is only possible if public documents are accessible. In the Court’s view, any restrictions must be lawful, necessary, and proportionate. Blanket exclusions, the redaction of officials’ names, and arbitrary rules run counter to transparent governance and threaten the fundamental pillars of a functioning democracy.

Subscribe now

Dutch Wind Farm Shuts Down 20 Turbines After Young Sea Eagle Killed

In Zeeland, the Netherlands, a wind farm had to shut down its 20 wind turbines after two young sea eagles were killed by the turbine blades. Now, the wind turbines near Kreekraksluizen are not allowed to operate during the day for the next few months, according to DutchNews.

According to the environmental agency, a white-tailed eagle had already been killed at the same wind farm previously. Following the incident in April, the agency determined that the wind farm’s owner had failed to meet its obligations to protect endangered species. The wind farm is now required to shut down 20 of its turbines out of 33 during the day. However, they may operate at night, as birds generally do not fly then. In addition, the wind farm must install a bird detection system in the coming months that can slow the blades within seconds if a white-tailed eagle approaches.

According to the environmental agency, a pair of white-tailed eagles nests on Lake Markiezaatsmeer near Bergen op Zoom. Currently, two chicks there are almost ready to fledge. When they begin flying, the young birds are still very clumsy. On their way to their feeding grounds in the Oosterschelde, they must fly past the turbines, and the associated risk is too great.

Forester Erik de Jonge said that, unfortunately, white-tailed eagles rarely succeed in raising their chicks, and the species is protected. Therefore, efforts must be made to prevent the chicks from perishing. De Jonge hopes that although the current incidents are extremely sad, they may help to better regulate the issue in the future. It is worth noting that white-tailed eagles had not been seen nesting in the Netherlands for decades until 2006, when a single pair reappeared. In recent years, the population of white-tailed eagles in the country has gradually increased, and around 45 nesting pairs were recorded last year.

• EU Court: Private Jet Manufacturing Can Be Green Investment

• Australia Doubles Fines for Social Media Age Ban Failures

• German State University Establishes Faculty of Islamic Theology

EU Court: Private Jet Manufacturing Can Be Green Investment

The General Court of the European Union annulled the European Commission’s decision to exclude private and business aircraft manufacturing from the list of economic activities considered environmentally sustainable. In doing so, it upheld the appeal filed by French aircraft manufacturer Dassault Aviation. The court found that the Commission had based its decision on erroneous grounds regarding carbon dioxide emissions, according to ESG News.

In 2020, the European Commission established a classification system for sustainable activities (the Taxonomy Regulation (EU) 2020/852) to determine whether an economic activity is environmentally sustainable. The goal is to guide investors toward activities that support the EU’s climate and environmental goals. In 2023, the Commission adopted a delegated regulation setting out technical criteria for classifying aircraft manufacturing. The Commission based its assessment on carbon dioxide emissions per passenger-kilometre and compared private and business aviation with other modes of transport. On this basis, it excluded the manufacture of aircraft intended for private or business aviation from activities contributing to climate change mitigation. Dassault Aviation challenged this decision before the General Court, arguing that the exclusion was unlawful.

The court examined whether the manufacture of private aircraft should be excluded due to emissions resulting from their use. It concluded that the Commission’s reasoning did not meet the required legal standard. It further held that other modes of transportation cannot always be considered low-carbon alternatives to private aviation, given the specific characteristics of private aircraft such as flexibility, speed, and connectivity. In the court’s view, the Commission also failed to take into account other relevant factors, particularly the potential use of sustainable aviation fuel.

However, the ruling does not declare private aircraft inherently environmentally friendly. But it limits the Commission’s ability to exclude aircraft manufacturing based on a broad comparison of operational emissions. The decision also requires EU agencies to better justify how they treat high-emission sectors where low-carbon technology is still emerging.

The Commission has two months to appeal the decision to the Court of Justice of the European Union. If it does not appeal, it will likely need to revise the relevant taxonomy criteria. In any case, the ruling may influence investor decisions, fund strategies, lending, and companies’ sustainability claims. The EU Taxonomy remains one of the world’s most influential tools for sustainable finance and is widely used by investors, banks, and companies.

Share

Australia Doubles Fines for Social Media Age Ban Failures

The Australian government is strengthening its social media age rules with new legislation. It will grant the eSafety Commissioner greater data collection powers and double fines for non-compliant companies. Although experience so far shows that the social media ban for young people has had limited success, authorities say they will not back down, reports Biometric Update.

Australia was the first countrie to introduce a social media ban for under-16s. However, it has not been fully effective because many platforms are not rigorously enforcing age verification, and around 75-85% of young users continue to bypass the restrictions. But instead of acknowledging the failure, the government is pushing for even stricter rules, touting the number of closed accounts and claiming that the world has followed Australia’s example.

In a press release, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese stated: “Australian parents have led this global movement, and we support them in keeping our kids safe. Social media companies have a social responsibility, and they must uphold their legal responsibility in Australia to keep those under 16 off social media.” He expressed satisfaction that, since the ban took effect on 10 December last year, more than 5 million accounts of under-16 users have been deactivated or restricted. Albanese added: “I’m heartened by the shift in conversation and the global momentum we’ve seen since introducing the social media minimum age, but it’s clear that big tech isn’t doing enough to comply with the law - there are still too many children on social media.” The government therefore plans to strengthen the eSafety Commissioner’s data collection powers and double the maximum penalty for breaches from 49.5 million Australian dollars (about 30 million euros) to 99 million Australian dollars (approximately 60 million euros).

Under the new plan, the eSafety Commissioner will be able to “compel social media companies to provide evidence of what they have done to prevent under-16s from creating an account.” The Commissioner may also request information from third parties, such as age verification providers or app stores. The government is also doubling the fines for failing to provide the required information.

Communications Minister Anika Wells criticised platforms for doing the bare minimum. “Social media platforms are some of the richest and most powerful companies in the world, and we’re serious about holding them to account,” she said. “These tough new penalties and powers show we will not back down. Instead, we are doubling down on our efforts to hold big tech to account.”

The five platforms under investigation - Meta’s Instagram and Facebook, Google’s YouTube, Snapchat, and TikTok - are being pushed to adopt more aggressive age verification. Critics argue this will lead to increased facial scanning and linking of accounts to real identities. However, none of this fully prevents young people from using someone else’s account, lying about their age, or submitting selfies with drawn moustaches or generated by AI that the platforms still approve. Critics therefore contend that the system has failed at its stated goal while succeeding at something it was never supposed to do: the large-scale collection of biometric and personal data.

Subscribe now

German State University Establishes Faculty of Islamic Theology

The University of Münster in Germany has become the first in Europe to establish a Faculty of Islamic Theology, which will begin operations this summer/fall.
The department’s mission is to promote “an open and enlightened understanding
of Islam,” reports Deutsche Welle.

Mouhanad Khorchide, who has served as director of the Center for Islamic Theology at the University of Münster, will serve as the founding dean of the newly established Faculty of Islamic Theology. According to Khorchide, the faculty’s status is a major achievement, and he believes it should be utilized to the fullest. The dean states that the faculty’s guiding principle is to affirm the compatibility of religion and democracy and to promote an academic and contemporary interpretation of the Quran. The scholar hopes that the work of the Faculty will thus have an impact on all of Europe and the Muslim community.

Although the Center for Islamic Theology has been operating since 2011, it has been dependent on another faculty due to its lack of independent faculty status. Now this situation is changing, and as a full faculty, Islamic Theology is gaining a new position and greater opportunities at the university. It will be possible to offer courses and degrees in Islamic Theology, nurture a new generation of scholars, and apply for research funding independently.

It is worth noting that in the early years of the Center for Islamic Theology, only 3 people worked there and there were just 15 students. Now, however, the center employs 8 professors and more than 50 staff members, and the dean expects the number of students to exceed 500 in the coming years (current enrollment is around 450). In any case, the professor predicts enormous demand for the faculty, which is certainly influenced by the fact that Islam is taught in many public schools in Germany. For example, in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany’s most populous state, there are currently only around 330 Islamic studies teachers on the job, but up to 3,000 teachers are needed.

In addition, Dean Khorchide plans to launch a master’s program in Islam and social work in 2027, which, according to the professor, is urgently needed, particularly in youth work, hospitals, and elder care.

These quotes highlight:
- the value of various individual freedoms, including freedom of speech and thought, academic freedom, freedom over one’s personal way of life, etc.
- the importance of value-based governance, and the dangers and harm of corrupt practices.

Share

1. Seneca, a Roman philosopher and statesman (4 BC - 65 AD)

   

2. Benjamin Franklin, statesman (1706-1790)

   

3. Milton Friedman, economist (1912-2006)

   

• Kennedy Revoked Emergency Use Authorizations for COVID-19 Products

• U.S. Supreme Court Backs State Bans on Trans Women in Female Sports

• Germany Censored a Film About Crime Committed by Immigrants

Kennedy Revoked Emergency Use Authorizations for COVID-19 Products

U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. signed determinations terminating the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) declarations for drugs, biological products, and medical devices issued during the COVID-19 pandemic. Kennedy determined that the circumstances justifying the emergency authorizations no longer exist. As a result, the declarations will expire after a transition period, according to the Department of Health and Human Services.

“Americans deserve a regulatory system that is transparent, accountable, and rooted in the rule of law,” said Kennedy. “By ending these COVID-19 emergency use authorization declarations, we’re reinforcing public confidence that emergency authorities are temporary and targeted.”

The department granted a 12-month transition period for drugs and biological products, and 180 days for medical devices. During this time, manufacturers, healthcare providers, distributors, and patients must transition from products authorized solely under the COVID-19 EUA declarations to regularly approved products. Meanwhile, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will work with manufacturers on appropriate regulatory pathways for products seeking traditional approval, clearance, or licensure.

The COVID-19 EUA declarations were first issued in 2020 by the then-Secretary of Health and Human Services to enable rapid access to medical products during the pandemic. These declarations were extended several times. Most recently, in late 2024, former Secretary Xavier Becerra supported amendments that extended certain liability protections through the end of 2029. At that time, officials noted that although the formal COVID-19 public health emergency had ended in May 2023, the virus remained a potential threat.

Share

Supreme Court Backs State Bans on Trans Women in Female Sports

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that states have the right to ban transgender women from participating in women’s sports. The Supreme Court issued its ruling in the Idaho and West Virginia cases and found that the states did not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution when they imposed bans on transgender women’s participation in women’s sports. The court held that the Constitution allows participants in sports to be classified based on their biological sex, according to the New York Post.

At the same time, the court emphasized that transgender athletes must be treated with respect. “Most of the biological female and transgender student-athletes involved in transgender sports disputes across the country are teenagers or in their early twenties,” wrote Justice Brett Kavanaugh. He added that they, too, want to participate in sports and that this desire must be respected. Kavanaugh found that no student-athlete deserves to be excluded or disparaged, whether she is a biological woman or a transgender woman.

Three liberal justices dissented, arguing that while the bans should remain in place, the legal justification for them should be much narrower. In their view, the court should not have ruled broadly on constitutionality and should have accepted the West Virginia plaintiff’s concession that “sex” means “biological sex” as determined at birth.

Rules similar to those in Idaho and West Virginia have been enacted in about 25–27 other states. Under these rules, men (biological males) are prohibited from participating in women’s sports competitions in both public schools and colleges. However, some states, such as California and Connecticut, still permit transgender participation in the opposite sex’s sports. The Supreme Court’s ruling does not automatically overturn those policies; it simply upheld the legality of the bans on a state-by-state basis. Thus, the decision does not impose a nationwide prohibition but leaves the choice to individual states.

Subscribe now

Germany Censored a Film About Crime Committed by Immigrants

The German Film Classification Board (FSK) refused to grant an age rating to the new film “Citizen Vigilante,” in which immigrants are portrayed as criminals and those fighting against them as heroes. The board’s refusal to assign any rating effectively left the film undistributable through regular channels in Germany, which amounts to a de facto ban on its commercial release. According to the director, the board’s decision is politically motivated, as reported by European Conservative.

German director Uwe Boll’s action film follows American businessman Michael Sanders (Armie Hammer), who takes the law into his own hands to fight criminal immigrants in Europe - especially those who have brutally attacked women and girls. According to Boll, he drew inspiration for the film from real criminal cases in Germany. In many ways, the film is based on a real gang rape case that took place in Hamburg, in which the juvenile offenders received only suspended sentences. Boll has explained that the film depicts the harsh reality of such cases, where justice is not served for the victims.

Boll clarified that while the film is a work of fiction, its purpose is to address European security issues. In the director’s view, the level of violence in the film is comparable to that in other popular films such as “John Wick” and “The Equalizer,” both of which were released in Germany without issue. Therefore, the director believes that the commission used the need to protect younger audiences from violence merely as a pretext.

According to Boll, the real goal was to suppress a film that addresses crime related to migration and portrays immigrants in a negative light. The commission objected to the film’s portrayal of immigrant criminals and the protagonist’s vigilante justice, which makes him both a wanted criminal and a hero. In the director’s view, the decision is politically motivated and reflects a prevailing trend within German institutions to marginalize viewpoints that question mainstream immigration policy. It is worth noting, however, that what is depicted in the film reflects a statistically documented phenomenon in several European countries.

Following the effective ban in Germany, Elon Musk released the film for 48 hours on the social media platform X. Currently the film is available on platforms such as Prime Video and Apple TV.

• London to Be Covered in Facial Recognition Cameras and Drones

• Asbestos Found in Chinese Wind Turbines

• Magdeburg Christmas Market Attacker Sentenced to Life

London to Be Covered in Facial Recognition Cameras and Drones

The Metropolitan Police are rolling out real-time facial recognition cameras in the West End and Soho and are planning a citywide drone network to tackle rising crime. Critics argue, however, that the authorities are expanding a surveillance network with enormous potential to violate privacy, reports the BBC.

The Metropolitan Police tested remote-controlled facial recognition cameras for six months in Croydon, South London; these were mounted on street structures. The police say the Croydon trials were highly successful and plan to install facial recognition cameras in central London by the end of the year and elsewhere in the capital next year.

According to Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley, modern technology has led to tremendous progress in police work, and about 80% of Londoners support the use of facial recognition. The Commissioner believes that the trials in Croydon were successful, as 173 people were arrested, including a woman who had been sought for more than 20 years, and only one false positive was recorded. In total, however, more than 470,000 people passed by the cameras in Croydon over the course of half a year, and since 2024, police across the country have arrested over 2,000 people using facial recognition cameras. But Rowley is still convinced: “The technology helps officers target wanted criminals and registered sex offenders. Crucially, it supports officers – it doesn’t replace them. Now we’re taking that capability further.”

In addition to facial recognition cameras, the Metropolitan Police have launched a drone network project in which drones respond to emergency calls, monitor the scene before officers arrive, and detect illegal activity. According to the police department, several drone units are already operating in London. Commissioner Rowley has now announced a plan to to expand the drone network throughout London and explained: “Drones are already transforming how we respond to incidents - getting visuals from the scene in minutes, giving officers critical intelligence, and helping us act faster and more safely.”

Critics, however, do not share Commissioner Rowley’s view on either facial recognition systems or drones. The human rights organization Liberty believes that facial recognition technology should be abandoned, at least until relevant laws are enacted. Big Brother Watch argues that while drones may have a role to play in emergencies, the police should not use them as constant, ubiquitous surveillance cameras. Big Brother Watch emphasized that the role of drones in police work has so far been rather vague, and authorities have refused to release documents that clearly describe their function. “It is alarming that potentially intrusive surveillance is being rolled out with such little scrutiny,” a spokesperson stressed.

Share

Asbestos Found in Chinese Wind Turbines

The United Kingdom has discovered asbestos in at least 1,000 wind turbines manufactured in China. White asbestos, or chrysotile, was primarily found in the brakes of elevators and lifting equipment. These components, according to reports, were sourced from third-party suppliers in China, as reported by Daily Business Group.

This type of asbestos has been completely banned in the United Kingdom since 1999. It is therefore illegal to buy, sell, or export any materials containing this substance. According to labor unions, the government banned asbestos decades ago because it was killing workers and their families. Yet now the government is effectively paying for the banned substance to be imported from the other side of the globe and then for the hazardous material to be removed.

At the same time, there is no evidence that elevator suppliers or wind farm owners were aware that the wind turbine components contained asbestos. The Energy Institute, a member organization of the wind energy sector, stated that it is aware of the problem. So far, asbestos has been found only in sealed components. Thus, the material is encapsulated; its casing does not break, and under normal conditions, no fibers are released into the air. In any case, the organization’s members have been tasked with working with elevator and turbine manufacturers to identify replacement parts and safe replacement methods.

Subscribe now

Magdeburg Christmas Market Attacker Sentenced to Life

A court in Magdeburg, eastern Germany, found a 51-year-old psychiatrist from Saudi Arabia guilty of ramming an SUV into a crowd at a Christmas market on December 20, 2024, killing six people and injuring hundreds. The court sentenced the man to life in prison after finding that the crime constituted a particularly serious offense under German criminal law, reports Deutsche Welle.

The man, who was granted asylum in Germany in 2006, was found guilty of six counts of murder, including the deaths of five women and a 9-year-old boy. He was also found guilty of hundreds of counts of attempted murder and causing serious bodily injury. Police managed to arrest the man at the scene immediately after the attack.

The man, who had fled Saudi Arabia, claimed to be a critic of the Saudi government’s political and religious persecution. He had criticized Islam, supported right-wing groups, and portrayed himself as a champion of women’s rights in Saudi Arabia. At the same time, he had several conflicts with German authorities.

According to prosecutors, the man’s actions were motivated by dissatisfaction over losing several civil and criminal court cases. Prosecutors were convinced that he acted alone, concerned only with himself. However, prosecutors did not find the defendant’s testimony in court particularly convincing. For example, he admitted that he drove his car into a crowd of Christmas market visitors but claimed he did not intentionally run people over. A psychiatric evaluation diagnosed the defendant with narcissistic personality disorder but concluded that he is nonetheless fully criminally responsible and remains a danger to others.

The convicted man may still appeal the court’s decision.

These quotes highlight:
- the value of various individual freedoms, including freedom of speech and thought, academic freedom, freedom over one’s personal way of life, etc.
- the importance of value-based governance, and the dangers and harm of corrupt practices.

Share

1. George Washington, the first US president (1732-1799)

   

2. Adam Smith, philosopher, and political economist (1723-1790)

   

3. Marcus Aurelius, Roman emperor and philosopher (121-180)

• Tulsi Gabbard Exposes Fauci

• Half a Million Brits Claim Covid Jab Harm

• 250,000 Young Girls Victims of Rape Gangs: Inquiry Exposes Decades of Institutional Failure

Tulsi Gabbard Exposes Fauci

Outgoing Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has released declassified documents that show Dr. Anthony Fauci – the main public face of the COVID era – not only misled the public and Congress about the origins of the virus but was also directly linked to funding risky coronavirus experiments at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

The files reveal that Fauci’s NIAID provided millions in U.S. taxpayer dollars – including roughly $600,000 via EcoHealth Alliance – for bat coronavirus research at the lab, which critics describe as gain-of-function work. The documents also highlight how Fauci shaped COVID-19 origin assessments, maintained undisclosed contacts with intelligence officials, and provided testimony to Congress that conflicted with the records.

The ODNI says the files show Fauci recommended scientific experts during the 2021 origins review and that NIAID-funded researchers were cited in assessments downplaying the lab-leak theory. The documents further highlight whistleblower complaints of pressure on analysts who supported a laboratory-related origin.

Announcing the release, Gabbard said the records were uncovered during a year-long declassification review and include communications that she argues reveal Fauci’s involvement in discussions linked to virus-origin investigations.

“The COVID-19 pandemic caused tremendous hardship and pain for millions of our fellow Americans and for countless people around the world. After years of lies, censorship, and cover-ups, the American people deserve transparency, truth, and accountability,” Gabbard said.

The information released is not new. However, it is now being officially admitted by the US government.

Fauci was pardoned by President Biden in January 2025, and the Trump administration has not charged him with any crimes. For example, Fauci was accused of lying to Congress during his May 2021 testimony, particularly regarding gain-of-function research and funding at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The five-year statute of limitations for those alleged false statements expired in May 2026, meaning the window for federal prosecution has now passed.

Last week, Gabbard declassified documents on U.S. funding for over 120 biological laboratories across more than 30 countries, including in Ukraine.

Half a Million Brits Claim Covid Jab Harm

Nearly half a million Britons claim to have suffered from side effects from the Covid jab, analysis of official figures reveals. Over 2,500 people have submitted reports claiming that a family member has died as a result of the jab, The Daily Mail reporst.

The figures from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) yellow card reporting scheme – which allows anyone to report complications from a drug – showed that the AstraZeneca jab had the most reported complications.

This comes after a report that the wife of John Cross, who took his own life after the Covid vaccine left him paralysed, has finally been awarded compensation, three years after her husband’s death. John Cross suffered a reaction to the AstraZeneca jab which left him in hospital on a ventilator, unable to move, talk, or breathe. He gradually managed to gain some mobility back, but never fully recovered after taking the jab. Despite his illness, he was rejected from a government scheme that paid a lump sum of £120,000 to people harmed by the vaccination.

After two years of waiting for a decision, he was told by a medical assessor that he was not disabled enough for a payment. Earlier this month, an independent tribunal with responsibility for overseeing the government’s Vaccine Damage Payment Scheme (VDPS), reversed that decision.

A Freedom of Information request (FOI) from last year shows that over 22,800 claims have been filed for compensation regarding serious disability or death following a COVID-19 vaccination. Of these, only about 1 per cent to 5 per cent have resulted in successful payouts, with just over 200 claimants receiving the statutory one-off tax-free payment.

Share

250,000 Young Girls Victims of Rape Gangs: Inquiry Exposes Decades of Institutional Failure

UK independent MP Rupert Lowe unveiled 219-page independent report detailing the systematic sexual exploitation of at least 250,000 young – mostly white – British girls by predominantly Pakistani Muslim grooming gangs since the 1950s, The European Conservative writes. In a video on X, Lowe described the crimes as “pure, driven, unfettered evil.”

The survivor-led Rape Gang Inquiry, funded by over 20,000 public donations, compiles chilling testimonies from victims, whistleblowers, and experts. It shows documentation of coordinated networks that have been operating in at least 149 local authority districts – which equals nearly 40% of the UK – involving drugging, gang rape, trafficking, torture, blackmail via recordings, and forced pregnancies.

The inquiry says perpetrators, overwhelmingly men of Muslim (primarily Pakistani) heritage, exploited vulnerabilities in care homes and schools with complicity from police, social services, the National Health Services, and politicians fearing racism accusations. It highlights cultural and religious factors, including interpretations of Islamic doctrine enabling enmity toward non-Muslims, and criticizes post-war immigration policies for enabling the scandal.

The report outlines a series of urgent, wide-ranging recommendations to address the systemic failures that enabled grooming gangs, deliver justice for victims, and prevent future abuse, including mandatory recording of ethnoreligious patterns in child sexual exploitation, harsher sentencing and penalties (including reinstituting the death penalty in extreme cases), and prioritized deportation of foreign nationals and offenders with dual citizenship. It also demands accountability from British institutions and new targeted laws for gang-based child sexual exploitation – along with the release of the full victim testimonies.

These quotes highlight:
- the value of various individual freedoms, including freedom of speech and thought, academic freedom, freedom over one’s personal way of life, etc.
- the importance of value-based governance, and the dangers and harm of corrupt practices.

Share

1. William Pitt the Younger, statesman and prime minister (1759–1806)

   

   2. Edmund Burke, statesman, and philosopher (1729-1797)

   

   3. Margaret Thatcher, politician (1925-2013)

   

• UK to Ban Social Media for Under-16s

• Sweden to Deport Immigrants for Bad Behavior

• England Fans Face FIFA Ban Over Anti-Keir Starmer Chants

UK to Ban Social Media for Under-16s

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced on Monday that the country plans to ban several social media platforms, including X, Facebook, and TikTok, for users under the age of 16.

“Every parent can see it with their own eyes. Social media is making children unhappy,” Starmer said. “I’ve heard first hand from families crying out for change and we will do right by them.”

The UK plans to follow the same model as Australia, which became the first country last year to ban social media for children under 16. Platforms that fail to take reasonable steps to exclude under-16s could face massive fines.

Although it has become apparent in Australia that young people are circumventing the ban and continuing to use social media, Starmer believes the UK will be able to enforce it effectively. According to Starmer, the ban is a “big moment for our country”, and he confirmed that the UK plans to go further than Australia’s measures. The ban will apply to major platforms, including Snapchat, TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, Facebook, and X, but not to YouTube Kids or messaging services such as WhatsApp and Signal. Some smaller platforms, such as Bluesky – X’s smaller competitor – have also been excluded for now.

Mike Benz, executive director of the Foundation for Freedom Online – a free-speech watchdog dedicated to a free and open internet – says the decision not to ban Bluesky stems from the European Union’s plan to target X while promoting Bluesky as an alternative. According to Benz, this is because US platforms do not want to fully comply with the EU’s online censorship demands, and the EU is planning to replace them with social media platforms it can better control.

At the same time, more and more countries, including those in Europe, are discussing bans on social media for children and young people. In the EU, the European Commission is spearheading the effort and has also proposed an age-verification app modeled after the COVID-19 vaccine passport. Europe’s desire to impose such a ban is no different from that of countries such as Russia or Turkey, where similar restrictions are also being planned.

At the same time, researchers in the fields of security and privacy have warned that age verification may fail to solve any real problems and could instead lead to increased censorship and the silencing of “inappropriate” individuals. The researchers emphasized that the impact of widespread age verification on security, privacy, freedom, and personal autonomy remains unknown.

Andy Yen, CEO of the Swiss VPN company Proton, acknowledges that children do face real dangers online and that parents’ concerns are justified and sincere. But he argues that the age verification solutions currently being hastily proposed everywhere are unacceptable and overly broad, as they spell the death of anonymity on the internet. At the same time, the more data is collected, the more it will inevitably be leaked – and the more tempting such vast data repositories will become for criminals.

In other words, there is no actual ban on social media for young people. Rather, it consists of mandatory digital identity checks for everyone, driven by authorities’ desire for greater surveillance and online censorship. Broadly speaking, this policy requires large technology companies to verify the identity of all users. It carries a significant risk of data leaks and will almost certainly eliminate online anonymity – which has until now allowed many people to speak freely about complex or controversial topics without risking their jobs or damaging personal relationships.

Sweden to Deport Immigrants for Bad Behavior

Sweden’s parliament passed a law on Monday allowing authorities to revoke immigrants’ residency permits based on bad behaviour, ​such as having unpaid debts, doing undeclared work or ‌links to extremist organisations, Reuters reports.

The law, which covers pending permits but also retroactively already granted permits, is part of a wider tightening of immigration ​rules by the Swedish government and its support party, ​the Sweden Democrats, ahead of a parliamentary election ⁠in September.

The ⁠government, which won the 2022 election on a promise to reduce immigration and crack down on crime, has said that people who misbehave or commit crimes are not welcome.

Sweden has had a problem with violent crime for a long time, particularly related to criminal gangs and organized crime. As we have reported, such gang violence and organized crime in Sweden are directly linked to large-scale immigration. We have further discussed the problems of uncontrolled immigration in Sweden in this analysis.

Share

England Fans Face FIFA Ban Over Anti-Keir Starmer Chants

England fans face the prospect of being ejected from FIFA World Cup stadiums in the US if they make anti-Keir Starmer chants throughout the tournament, The Daily Mail reports.

There is a strong feeling of discontent with the Prime Minister among large numbers of England’s hardcore support. The chant has been heard at numerous recent matches and appears to have made its way across the Atlantic for the World Cup.

Large sections of travelling supporters have been heard singing ‘Keir Starmer’s a w****r’ during England’s second pre-tournament friendly in Orlando - and the chant was already being sung in bars and pubs in and around Dallas ahead of the Croatia match tonight.

England football fans have also been warned that they cannot bring flags honouring our war dead into World Cup stadiums - because they feature a silhouette of a soldier holding a rifle.

FIFA rules aimed at making matches apolitical events prohibit banners, flags apparel or clothing deemed to be offensive, discriminatory or political. Its stadium code of conduct also warns fans not to ‘use offensive language or gestures’.

• Starmer Calls for Spyware on All Phones

• Belfast Riots: British Politicians Blame Elon Musk

• BP Scraps Net Zero division

Starmer Calls for Spyware on All Phones

In a speech at London Tech Week, Prime Minister Keir Starmer issued a request to tech companies operating in the UK - introduce device controls that prevent children from sending and receiving explicit images or face punishment, the BBC reports.

The government says Britain will become the first country in the world to stop children taking, sharing, or viewing naked pictures on their devices.

Companies have three months to make changes or the government will bring forward legislation to force them, the PM said.

This is yet another measure being introduced in the name of the ‘protection of children,’ but it will, in practice, undermine everyone’s privacy. As Reclaim The Net puts it, Starmer is essentially calling for spyware to be installed on all phones. “The trouble is the two innocent-looking words tucked into the speech like a wasp in a picnic basket, the words “device-level.” Here is what “device-level” means once you peel off the cuddly branding. To catch one naughty photo on your phone, something has to inspect every photo on your phone. All of them,” they wrote.

Starmer’s announcement was also met with criticism by Big Brother Watch, which called it “extreme technological censorship”.

Belfast Riots: British Politicians Blame Elon Musk

Street riots that escalated from protests against serious crimes committed by immigrants erupted this week in Belfast, the capital of Northern Ireland. The immediate trigger was a particularly brutal attempted murder allegedly committed by an immigrant from Sudan.

Hadi Alodid, a 30-year-old man from Sudan, attacked his victim with a knife in the Kinnaird Avenue area of north Belfast on Monday evening. Video footage circulating on social media appears to show an exceptionally brutal attack: a dark-skinned man repeatedly stabs his victim in the face and neck. According to some accounts, he even attempted to decapitate him. The video also shows several bystanders intervening, pushing the attacker away and restraining him until police arrived.

The victim, Stephen Olgivie, suffered very serious injuries, lost his left eye, and remained in critical condition in hospital.

Alodid appeared in court on Wednesday, where he was charged with attempted murder and denied bail.

Alodid, who is of Sudanese origin, is a recent immigrant to Northern Ireland. He arrived in February 2023 after flying from Paris to Dublin. Upon arrival, he applied for asylum and, in September 2023, was granted permission to remain in the United Kingdom until 2028.

Mass immigration and its associated costs to taxpayers – many asylum seekers are housed in hotels funded by the state – are already pressing issues in the United Kingdom. Crime statistics have also drawn attention to concerns regarding immigrant crime, particularly violent offenses and sexual assaults.

In this social and political context, it is not surprising that the brutal attempted murder committed by Alodidi sparked another wave of anti-immigration protests. By the evening and into the night, however, the demonstrations escalated into riots. Hotels housing asylum seekers were reportedly targeted, although they were protected by police.

This led to clashes between police and protesters. Police deployed rubber bullets and water cannons, while protesters threw objects at officers and set cars on fire.

British politicians have meanwhile found a scapegoat for all of this: once again, it is Elon Musk. On Wednesday, Musk wrote on his social media platform X: “Murderous migrants beheading innocent people in their home town is what’s making people angry, not “social media”!”.

He also reposted a post by another user that stated: “Keir Starmer clearly hates white people.”

“It’s appalling,” Labour Party Chair Anna Turley said of Musk’s interventions, speaking to Britain’s LBC radio station Thursday. “Anyone that is seeking to drive and exploit a situation like this to drive their own political agenda is grievously wrong and doing damage. We’ve seen children, families having to flee their homes on the streets of Belfast last night.” Michelle O’Neill, the first minister of Northern Ireland, had earlier condemned “the Elon Musks of this world,” who she said “are sitting right comfy in their homes, orchestrating hate and tension.”

Starmer did not mention Musk by name, but called out “those who encouraged it, online or elsewhere.” He also criticized people “trying to interfere in our democracy and seeking to stir up division on our streets.”

His official spokesperson added Thursday that the government “will not tolerate platforms being used to spread violence.”

Belfast is already the second major British city this June to witness anti-immigration protests and clashes with police. A similar wave of unrest erupted in Southampton in early June. The protests there were fueled not only by a brutal murder committed by an immigrant but also by the conduct of the police.

Specifically, 23-year-old Vickrum Digwa, who is of Indian origin, stabbed 18-year-old student Henry Nowak in early December last year. According to body-camera footage released during the trial, the police officers who arrived at the scene did not believe Nowak when he said he had been stabbed and could not breathe. Instead of providing assistance, they treated the injured young man as a suspect, arresting and handcuffing him while he lay on the ground.

In doing so, the officers relied solely on claims made by Digwa and his brother that Nowak had previously behaved in a racist manner and that Digwa had therefore been acting in self- The UK police have announced that they are now preparing for summer riots in the wake of the incident.

Share

BP Scraps Net Zero division

BP has pared back its Net Zero division as it pivots back towards oil and gas, GB News reports.

The company has confirmed that it will be split into two divisions – upstream and downstream. It currently operates with three divisions, with one focused on “gas and low carbon energy”. Renewables fall under this division, but will next year come under a separate “Other Businesses” segment.

The shift marks a return to the company structure BP abandoned six years ago, when it attempted to pursue a greener agenda. Then chief executive Bernard Looney introduced the gas and low carbon energy division as part of this green drive. But under current chief executive, Meg O’Neill, BP has rowed back.

The company announced last year that it would be cutting renewable energy investments to focus on increasing oil and gas production.

It had come under increasing pressure from investors unhappy that its profits and share price were lower than its rivals.