Wednesday, May 7, 2025

Polaris of Enlightenment

Ad:

Big Brother watching: British police map citizens with AI technology

Totalitarianism

Published 15 January 2024
– By Editorial Staff
Civil rights groups are sounding the alarm that facial recognition technology can and will be abused.

British police have secretly conducted hundreds of facial recognition searches using the UK’s database of more than 46 million passport holders.

Civil liberties group Big Brother Watch calls the development “deeply worrying” and points out that “there is no clear legal basis for this intrusive technology”.

Last year, policing minister Chris Philip raised the possibility of police accessing the database of British passport holders to use facial recognition technology to identify suspects of crimes including burglary, theft and shoplifting, according to The Telegraph.

In reality, however, the AI technology has been secretly used for this purpose since 2019 or earlier, and the passport database was searched at least 300 times in the first nine months of 2023 alone.

The revelation has led to harsh criticism from several civil liberties groups and MPs, who are concerned about the implications of such searches for data protection and citizens’ privacy. Former cabinet minister David Davis also argues that there is “no explicit legal basis” for the use of facial recognition technology in the UK.

– The data on both the UK passport database and the immigration database was not provided for these purposes,” he said. “For the police to act like this undermines the data relationship between the citizen and the state. At the very least, the House of Commons should be informed precisely who authorised this and who carried it out, Davis comments.

“Risk losing the trust of the public”

Tony Porter, the former CCTV Commissioner, says it is “problematic” that passport holders’ data was sought by the police without their knowledge or consent to be used for such a purpose.

– The other thing that is problematic is that the Government has extolled the importance of transparency. They should be putting this out there about how and why it’s legitimate otherwise they risk losing the trust and confidence of the public, Porter says.

With facial recognition technology, police can use images from sources such as surveillance cameras or cell phones – even those that are blurred or partially obscured – and search for matches in a database of potential suspects.

Use of the technology has increased sharply in recent years, and police forces already conduct thousands of searches each year against the Police National Database, which contains some 16 million images of people who have been arrested, including hundreds of thousands who have never been charged or acquitted of crimes.

Government refuses to back down

In December, it emerged that police would also soon be able to search a database of Britain’s 50 million driving license holders under a new law making its way through Parliament.

Madeleine Stone, of civil liberties group Big Brother Watch, calls the expansion of AI surveillance “deeply worrying” and says there is “no clear legal basis for this invasive technology”.

But the UK government is standing firm, saying “the Government is committed to making sure the police have the tools and technology they need to solve and prevent crimes, bring offenders to justice, and keep people safe”.

TNT is truly independent!

We don’t have a billionaire owner, and our unique reader-funded model keeps us free from political or corporate influence. This means we can fearlessly report the facts and shine a light on the misdeeds of those in power.

Consider a donation to keep our independent journalism running…

Comment: When globalism is threatened the establishment respond with repression

Totalitarianism

We see it time and again: when the ideas of globalism are challenged by the will of the people, voters' voices are met with surveillance, censorship, and threats of bans. In reality, you only have the freedom to choose as long as you choose "correctly".

Published 5 May 2025
– By Jenny Piper
There are concerns that Friedrich Merz will heed the demands of outgoing Interior Minister Nancy Faeser and her allies - and ban the AfD altogether.
{ $opinionDisclaimer }

After the German security service BfV decided to classify the party Alternative for Germany (AfD) as “right-wing extremist” – which allows the regime to infiltrate, mass-surveil, and sabotage the popular opposition party – the German left-wing bloc has moved forward with attempts to completely ban the party, which is Germany’s second-largest party in the Bundestag and, in recent polls, has been the country’s largest party.

As expected, this has passed without objection from the Swedish establishment, which is exactly the same trash as its German counterpart.

However, US Vice President JD Vance is not holding back on his criticism and is drawing attention to the move on X.

“The AfD is the most popular party in Germany, and by far the most representative of East Germany. Now the bureaucrats try to destroy it. The West tore down the Berlin Wall together. And it has been rebuilt – not by the Soviets or the Russians, but by the German establishment”.

Throughout Europe, those in power are vigorously and, unfortunately, effectively opposing the growing parties that embrace nationalism instead of globalism, which runs counter to the established politically correct view that has been allowed to dominate for so long without any significant opposition.

Bans and increased repression against dissenting voices are now spreading –  the hope lies with the peoples of the rest of Europe to take up the fight against the ruling elite and stand up for their values and true democracy.

The well-indoctrinated population of Sweden will certainly not be a contributing factor – on the contrary, we immediately side with the oppressors, ready to point the finger.

 

Jenny Piper

All Jenny Piper's articles can be found on her blog.

US condemns extremist labeling of AfD: “Tyranny in disguise”

Totalitarianism

Published 4 May 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Marco Rubio says it is the political establishment and its policies that are "extreme" - not the AfD.

The decision by Germany’s domestic intelligence service to classify the Alternative for Germany party as “right-wing extremist” has led to strained relations between the US and Germany.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio calls the actions of those in power “tyranny in disguise” and points out that it is Germany’s boundless mass immigration policy that is “extremist” – not the nationalist party that the authorities now intend to spy on.

Recently, The Nordic Times drew attention to how the German constitutional protection agency decided to classify the entire AfD as a “right-wing extremist” organization – because of its immigration-critical rhetoric and nationalist ideology. In practice, this means that the state is given expanded powers to monitor the party, for example through wiretapping and the use of infiltrators.

Although the German establishment has a long tradition of combating or criminalizing political dissent, the latest announcement comes as a shock to many – not least because the AfD is now the second largest party in the country and the largest in some eastern German states.

One person who has reacted strongly to the fact that the party, despite its popularity, has now been labeled an enemy of the German state is US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who argues that it is rather the establishment parties that should be considered “extremists”.

Germany just gave its spy agency new powers to surveil the opposition. That’s not democracy – it’s tyranny in disguise. What is truly extremist is not the popular AfD – which took second in the recent election – but rather the establishment’s deadly open border immigration policies that the AfD opposes. Germany should reverse course”, he writes on X.

Germany: “Right-wing extremism needs to be stopped”

Vice President JD Vance shares this view, pointing out that the Berlin Wall has been rebuilt—but this time not by a foreign occupying power, but by Germany’s own politicians.

“The AfD is the most popular party in Germany, and by far the most representative of East Germany. Now the bureaucrats try to destroy it. The West tore down the Berlin Wall together. And it has been rebuilt – not by the Soviets or the Russians, but by the German establishmentt”.

However, the German Foreign Ministry defends the AfD’s extremist label, arguing that “this is democracy”.

This decision is the result of a thorough & independent investigation to protect our Constitution & the rule of law. It is independent courts that will have the final say. We have learnt from our history that rightwing extremism needs to be stopped”, they stated.

“European courts cancelling elections”

The Nordic Times has previously highlighted how JD Vance has already condemned the European establishment and accused it of undermining democracy and citizens’ freedom of expression.

– When we see European courts cancelling elections and senior officials threatening to cancel others, we ought to ask whether we’re holding ourselves to an appropriately high standard? asked the US Vice President during the security conference in Munich in February, continuing:

– If your democracy can be destroyed with a few hundred thousand dollars of digital advertising from a foreign country, then it wasn’t very strong to begin with.

Brits imprisoned at record numbers for opinion crimes

Totalitarianism

Published 4 May 2025
– By Editorial Staff

The signs of democratic decline in the UK are growing. Citizens are now being arrested in their tens of thousands for alleged crimes of opinion on social media, while freedom of expression continues to be curtailed in the country.

Western leaders often use Russia as a cautionary example of anti-democratic laws targeting the country’s citizens, while more and more countries in the West are themselves tightening the screws on the right to speak and write freely.

Hate crime laws are being used more and more frequently in the UK to silence popular discontent, according to an article in Tablet Magazine from March 2025, among other sources. According to a recent report by the free speech organization The Free Speech Union, the police make around 12,000 arrests annually for content on social media that is deemed “offensive”. This figure also marks a 58 percent increase since 2019.

Official statistics from the UK also show a clear trend. In 2023, 145,214 hate crimes were recorded, according to government data. The figure fell slightly to 140,561 in 2024, but arrests for social media posts continued to rise.

Politicians in the UK, including the current government, defend the increasingly harsh laws on the grounds that so-called minorities must be protected.

Legislation such as the Communications Act 2003 and the Malicious Communications Act 1988 underlies many interventions. These laws prohibit posts, messages, and expressions that may be considered grossly offensive or threatening.
Police make 30 arrests a day for offensive online messages, states The Free Speech Union in its analysis.

Unlike many other countries, the United Kingdom also has no formal constitution protecting freedom of expression.

The Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) is intended to guarantee fundamental rights, including the right to freedom of expression under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. However, the HRA does not have the same constitutional status and can be amended or repealed by ordinary legislation.

The Malicious Communications Act 1988 (MCA) is a UK law that prohibits sending or delivering messages, letters or other items with the intention of causing alarm or distress to the recipient. The Act applies to both physical and electronic communications, including social media posts.

Under this law, it is illegal to send messages that are:

  • Greatly offensive or indecent
  • Threatening
  • False and deliberately disseminated to mislead or harm

.For a person to be convicted, the prosecution must prove that the intention was to cause the recipient alarm or distress. The penalty can be a fine or imprisonment up to two years.

The Communications Act 2003, in particular section 127, extends the rules to electronic communications networks and prohibits sending messages that are:

  • Greatly offensive, indecent, obscene or menacing
  • intended to cause annoyance, inconvenience or needless alarm

.The mental aspect of this law is broader, meaning that it is enough that the person should have realized that the message could be offensive or risk offending the recipient.

Germany’s security service labels AfD as extremist

Totalitarianism

Published 4 May 2025
– By Editorial Staff
AfD party leader Alice Weidel condemns the announcement.

The German constitutional protection agency, Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz (BfV), has decided to classify the entire Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) party as a “right-wing extremist” organization. The agency announced this on Friday after what it described as an “intense and comprehensive” investigation.

The classification gives the state extended powers to monitor the party, for example through wiretapping and the use of infiltrators. The BfV has previously designated the AfD’s regional branches in Thuringia and Saxony-Anhalt as “proven extremist”.

In its statement, the BfV mentions that the party represents a view of “ethnicity-and ancestry-based conception of the people that predominates within the party is not compatible with the free democratic order”. The agency also highlights “xenophobic, anti-minority, Islamophobic and anti-Muslim statements made by leading party officials” as reasons for its decision.

AfD party leaders Alice Weidel and Tino Chrupalla call the decision a politically motivated attack and condemn it in a public statement.

Today’s decision by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution is a serious blow to German democracy: in current polls, the AfD is the strongest party. The federal government has only four days left in office, and the secret service does not even have a president anymore. And the classification as a so-called ‘suspicious case’ has not been legally finalized, the statement reads, and continues:

Nevertheless, the AfD, as an opposition party, is now being publicly discredited and criminalized shortly before the change of government. The associated targeted interference in the democratic decision-making process is therefore clearly politically motivated. The AfD will continue to defend itself legally against these defamatory attacks that threaten democracy”.

Our independent journalism needs your support!
We appreciate all of your donations to keep us alive and running.

Our independent journalism needs your support!
Consider a donation.

You can donate any amount of your choosing, one-time payment or even monthly.
We appreciate all of your donations to keep us alive and running.

Dont miss another article!

Sign up for our newsletter today!

Take part of uncensored news – free from industry interests and political correctness from the Polaris of Enlightenment – every week.