Connect with us

Censorship Industrial Complex

Biometric and Digital ID in Crisis Zones: Is the Red Cross Paving the Way for a Privacy Nightmare?

Published

3 minute read

From Reclaim The Net

By

The Red Cross (ICRC) is the latest long-established and operating international organization of considerable repute, that has found itself enlisted to, essentially, help the biometrics data-reliant ID happen.

Specifically, the Switzerland-based ICRC seems to have gotten involved in a schemeĀ developed to such an endĀ by Germany’s CISPA Helmholtz Center for Information Security, and also Switzerland-based Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne (EPFL).

The scheme is called the Janus system.

While formally and generally working in any region affected by natural or human-created disasters – helping refugees, casualties, the issue of missing or displaced persons – the ICRC is mandated first and foremost by the 1949 Geneva Convention.

But the times have in the meantime clearly changed quite considerably – and now there’s the initiative to “hoover up” ICRC’s many decades of experience, and repute, into a “new reality.”

Such as creating new tools “aimed at verifying the identities of humanitarian aid recipients.”

And once again, the focus is onĀ developing nations. This time – not entirely unlike the stated rationale behind recent UK’s recent mass surveillance effort under the guise of fighting tax money fraud – the focus is supposedly to make sure that those caught up in humanitarian crises areas do not submit “multiple registrations.”

It’s either to make sure humanitarian aid gets to as many people as possible – or, a handy opportunity to present this problem as one without a solution, other than drastic things like biometric data getting introduced into the mix.

There has now been a disturbingly high number of instances of Western-based and/or majority-funded organizations, formal (like the UN), or informal but powerful ones, “testing abroad” the tech that they know would face serious and strong opposition at home.

And that’s in countries and societies where the dangers to privacy and security are either not well-advocated or are simply voided by the everyday bare necessity to survive.

Biometric data harvesting, retention, usage, and (ab)use fall in this category, and as much as civil rights organizations in developed countries are to be praised for the work they do or attempt to do at home, it should be said that the “backdoor experiments” taking place in poorer countries not getting enough spotlight is something these groups definitely need to work on.

If youā€™re tired of censorship and surveillance,Ā subscribe to Reclaim The Net.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Censorship Industrial Complex

France condemned for barring populist leader Marine Le Pen from 2027 election

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Frank Wright

It remains to be seen how long the rule of lawfare can last against the rising demand for popular politics. The globalist remnants across the West are now liberal democracies in name only.

Marine Le Pen, the former leader of the populist French opposition party, has been sentenced to prison and barred from standing for election as president in 2027, following a court ruling against her for alleged financial crimes.

Le Pen is currentlyĀ leadingĀ polls to win the presidential election, being 11 to 17 points ahead of the party of the globalist President Emmanuel Macron.

The rulingĀ MondayĀ on charges of ā€œmisuse of EU fundsā€ sees Le Pen, leader of the National Rally (RN) party, facing two yearsā€™ imprisonment and a five-year ban on running for elected office. Her lawyer stated she would appeal the ruling.

 

Speaking a day before the verdict, Le Pen said,Ā ā€œThere are 11 million people who voted for the movement I represent. So tomorrow, potentially, millions and millions of French people would see themselves deprived of their candidate in the election.ā€

She is to address the French nation in a televised statement Monday night.

Party leader Jordan BardellaĀ respondedĀ on X, saying,Ā ā€œToday, it is not only Marine Le Pen who is unjustly condemned: it is French democracy that is being executed.ā€

Bardella hasĀ calledĀ for ā€œpeaceful mobilizationā€ in support of Marine Le Pen, with a petition launched in protest at the ā€œdemocratic scandalā€ of her effective cancellation as a candidate.

The RNĀ wonĀ 33 percent of the vote in the first round of the 2024 French parliamentary elections, being the single largest party overall. It is prevented from entering government by a ā€œcordon sanitaireā€ ā€“ an agreement between liberal-global and left-wing parties to ā€œfirewallā€ national-populists from power regardless of how many people vote for them.

Le Penā€™s appeal would suspend the jail sentence and the fine of 100,000 euros ā€“ but would not be heard until 2026, effectively sabotaging her preparations for the 2027 election should she win. The ban takes effect when the appeal process is exhausted, meaning Le Pen is free to campaign until her appeal is heard in a yearā€™s time.

The courtĀ ruledĀ that Le Pen, whose RN was the single largest party in the recent French parliamentary elections, had misused 3 million euros in EU funds by paying party officials based in France.

She had told Franceā€™sĀ La Tribune DimancheĀ on Saturday thatĀ ā€œthe judges have the power of life or death over our movement.ā€

The judges appear to have given her party a death sentence. Eight further RN members and twelve assistants were also found guilty in the same trial.

Elon Musk hasĀ warnedĀ the move will ā€œbackfire,ā€ with globalist house magazineĀ The EconomistĀ inĀ agreementĀ that ā€œher sentence for corrupt use of EU funds could strengthen the hard right.ā€ Its report stated,Ā ā€œBarring Marine Le Pen is a political earthquake for France.ā€

The shockwaves have reached across Europe, and around the world. Italyā€™s Deputy Prime Minister Matteo SalviniĀ calledĀ the courtā€™s ruling a ā€œdeclaration of war by Brussels,ā€ joining Dutch and Hungarian national-populist leaders Geert Wilders and Viktor Orban in condemnation of the move.

 

According to commentators, the legal ruling shows that the liberal-global regime is now canceling democracy. Independent journalist Michael Shellenberger said on X of worldwide globalist moves to criminalize its opponents:Ā ā€œThis is a five alarm fire.ā€

 

Citing the lawfare undertaken against then-candidate Donald Trump, former State Department official Mike Benz described the many examples of the rule of lawfare were ā€œa dagger in the heart of democracyā€:

 

Donald Trump Jr.Ā askedĀ whether the French judiciary are ā€œjust trying to prove JD Vance was rightā€ ā€“ referring to the vice presidentā€™s ā€œblisteringĀ attackĀ on European leadersā€ over their rising censorship and anti-democratic moves. VanceĀ toldĀ EU and UK leaders in Munich,Ā ā€œDemocracy rests on the sacred principle that the voice of the people matters. There is no room for firewalls. You either uphold the principle or you donā€™t.ā€

U.S. political strategist Steve Bannon also referenced populist figures facing legal persecution in his ā€œWar Roomā€ rundown of the Le Pen affair today:

 

The move to legally ā€œfirewallā€ Le Pen has left even her political opponents disturbed, with the ruling Prime Minister Francois BayrouĀ reportedlyĀ ā€œdisquietedā€ by the verdict. Jean-Luc Melenchon, the leader of the left-liberal LFI and a determined political enemy of Le Pen, has said,Ā ā€œThe decision to remove an elected official should be up to the peopleā€ ā€“ not the courts.

Right-populist leader Eric Zemmour, who coined the term ā€œremigration,ā€Ā warnedĀ of a ā€œcoup dā€™etatā€ of activist judges in 1997 ā€“ and saidĀ todayĀ thatĀ ā€œeverything has to changeā€ as ā€œit is not for judges to decide for whom the people must vote.ā€

Laurent Wauquiez of the conservative Les Republicains ā€“ who have also refused to work with the RN in coalition ā€“Ā said,Ā ā€œThe decision to condemn Marine Le Pen is heavy and exceptional. In a democracy, it is unhealthy that an elected official be forbidden to stand for election.ā€

It seems this latest example of liberal-global lawfare may even see Le Penā€™s party rise in the polls, with aĀ surveyĀ today showing two-thirds of all French voters saying her ineligibility would not stop them voting for her RN party.

Nearly half of voters believe she was treated harshly ā€œfor political reasons,ā€ with a quarter believing the move to bar her will be a ā€œtrump cardā€ for the party overall.

Whether the move ā€œbackfiresā€ or not, the message to Western electorates is becoming clear. You can vote for liberals of the left, right, or center ā€“ because anyone offering a real alternative will be locked out of power, or locked up in jail.

It remains to be seen how long the rule of lawfare can last against the rising demand for popular politics. After canceled elections, speech crackdowns, and criminalizing their opponents, the globalist remnants across the West are now liberal democracies in name only.

Continue Reading

Censorship Industrial Complex

Welcome to Britain, Where Critical WhatsApp Messages Are a Police Matter

Published on

logo

By

ā€œIt was just unfathomable to me that things had escalated to this degree,ā€

ā€œWeā€™d never used abusive or threatening language, even in private.ā€

Youā€™d think that in Britain, the worst thing that could happen to you after sending a few critical WhatsApp messages would be a passive-aggressive reply or, at most, a snooty whisper campaign. What you probably wouldnā€™t expect is to have six police officers show up on your doorstep like theyā€™re hunting down a cartel. But thatā€™s precisely what happened to Maxie Allen and Rosalind Levine ā€” two parents whose great offense was asking some mildly inconvenient questions about how their daughterā€™s school planned to replace its retiring principal.
This is not an episode of Black Mirror. This is Borehamwood, Hertfordshire, 2025. And the parents in questionā€”Maxie Allen, a Times Radio producer, and Rosalind Levine, 46, a mother of twoā€”had the gall to inquire, via WhatsApp no less, whether Cowley Hill Primary School was being entirely above board in appointing a new principal.
What happened next should make everyone in Britain pause and consider just how overreaching their government has become. Because in the time it takes to send a meme about the schoolā€™s bake sale, you too could be staring down the barrel of a ā€œmalicious communicationsā€ charge.
The trouble started in May, shortly after the school’s principal retired. Instead of the usual round of polite emails, clumsy PowerPoints, and dreary Q&A sessions, there was… silence. Maxie Allen, who had once served as a school governorā€”so presumably knows his way around a budget meetingā€”asked the unthinkable: when was the recruitment process going to be opened up?
A fair question, right? Not in Borehamwood, apparently. The school responded not with answers, but with a sort of preemptive nuclear strike.
Jackie Spriggs, the chair of governors, issued a public warning about ā€œinflammatory and defamatoryā€ social media posts and hinted at disciplinary action for those who dared to cause ā€œdisharmony.ā€ One imagines this word being uttered in the tone of a Bond villain stroking a white cat.
Parents Allen and Levine were questioned by police over their WhatsApp messages.
For the crime of ā€œcasting aspersions,ā€ Allen and Levine were promptly banned from the school premises. That meant no parentsā€™ evening, no Christmas concert, no chance to speak face-to-face about the specific needs of their daughter Sascha, whoā€”just to add to the bleakness of it allā€”has epilepsy and is registered disabled.
So what do you do when the school shuts its doors in your face? You send emails. Lots of them. You try to get answers. And if that fails, you mightā€”just mightā€”vent a little on WhatsApp.
But apparently, that was enough to earn the label of harassers. Not in the figurative, overly sensitive, ā€œKarenā€™s upset againā€ sense. No, this was the actual, legal, possibly-prison kind of harassment.
Then came January 29. Rosalind was at home sorting toys for charityā€”presumably a heinous act in todayā€™s climateā€”when she opened the door to what can only be described as a low-budget reboot of Line of Duty. Six officers. Two cars. A van. All to arrest two middle-aged parents whose biggest vice appears to be stubborn curiosity.
ā€œI saw six police officers standing there,ā€ she said. ā€œMy first thought was that Sascha was dead.ā€
Instead, it was the prelude to an 11-hour ordeal in a police cell. Eleven hours. Thatā€™s enough time to commit actual crimes, be tried, be sentenced, and still get home in time for MasterChef.
Allen called the experience ā€œdystopian,ā€ and, for once, the word isnā€™t hyperbole. ā€œIt was just unfathomable to me that things had escalated to this degree,ā€ he said. ā€œWe’d never used abusive or threatening language, even in private.ā€
Worse still, they were never even told which communications were being investigated. Itā€™s like being detained by police for ā€œvibes.ā€
One of the many delightful ironies here is that the school accused them of causing a ā€œnuisance on school property,ā€ despite the fact that neither of them had set foot on said property in six months.
Now, in the schoolā€™s defenseā€”such as it isā€”they claim they went to the police because the sheer volume of correspondence and social media posts had become ā€œupsetting.ā€ Which raises an important question: when did being ā€œupsettingā€ become a police matter?
What weā€™re witnessing is not a breakdown in communication, but a full-blown bureaucratic tantrum. Instead of engaging with concerned parents, Cowley Hillā€™s leadership took the nuclear option: drag them out in cuffs and let the police deal with it.
Hertfordshire Constabulary, apparently mistaking Borehamwood for Basra, decided this was a perfectly normal use of resources. ā€œThe number of officers was necessary,ā€ said a spokesman, ā€œto secure electronic devices and care for children at the address.ā€
Right. Nothing says ā€œchildcareā€ like watching your mom get led away in handcuffs while your toddler hides in the corner, traumatized.
After five weeksā€”five weeks of real police time, in a country where burglaries are basically a form of inheritance transferā€”the whole thing was quietly dropped. Insufficient evidence. No charges. Not even a slap on the wrist.
So here we are. A story about a couple who dared to question how a public school was run, and ended up locked in a cell, banned from the school play, and smeared with criminal accusations for trying to advocate for their disabled child.
This is Britain in 2025. A place where public institutions behave like paranoid cults and the police are deployed like private security firms for anyone with a bruised ego. All while the rest of the population is left wondering how many other WhatsApp groups are one message away from a dawn raid.
Because if this is what happens when you ask a few inconvenient questions, whatā€™s next? Fingerprinting people for liking the wrong Facebook post? Tactical units sent in for sarcastic TripAdvisor reviews?
Itā€™s a warning. Ask the wrong question, speak out of turn, and you too may get a visit from half the local police force.
Continue Reading

Trending

X