Sunday, June 1, 2025

Polaris of Enlightenment

X refuses to impose censorship – now the EU wants to punish the platform

Published 15 July 2024
– By Editorial Staff
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Elon Musk, owner of X.

The European Commission claims that X (formerly Twitter) is “in breach of the Digital Services Act (DSA)” – and therefore the platform is at risk of millions of euros in fines and other retaliatory measures.

However, owner Elon Musk and other commentators argue that the powers that be are out to punish X because, unlike many other social media platforms, it has refused to secretly impose extensive censorship on the platform.

The Commission’s “preliminary view” is that X is in breach of the DSA because, among other things, the blue checkmarks indicating who has a verified account “does not correspond to industry practice and deceives users”.

“Since anyone can subscribe to obtain such a “verified” status, it negatively affects users’ ability to make free and informed decisions about the authenticity of the accounts and the content they interact with”, it claims.

The Brussels powers-that-be also claim that X “does not comply with the required transparency on advertising, as it does not provide a searchable and reliable advertisement repository”, and are also appalled that X “fails to provide access to its public data to researchers”.

“In particular, X prohibits eligible researchers from independently accessing its public data, such as by scraping, as stated in its terms of service. In addition, X’s process to grant eligible researchers access to its application programming interface (API) appears to dissuade researchers from carrying out their research projects or leave them with no other choice than to pay disproportionally high fees”, it continues.

 

A retaliatory measure?

“If the Commission’s preliminary views are ultimately confirmed, the Commission would adopt a non-compliance decision finding that X is in breach of Articles 25, 39 and 40(12) of the Digital Services Directive. Such a decision could impose fines of up to 6% of the service provider’s total annual worldwide turnover and require the service provider to take measures to remedy the infringement”, it threatens, promising to “force” X to comply in such a scenario.

X owner Elon Musk, however, believes that this is an act of pure vengeance by the powers that be in Brussels, and says that the European Commission recently “offered X an illegal secret deal” to avoid heavy fines – in exchange for introducing extensive censorship.

“The other platforms took the deal. X did not”, he continues.

“Don’t be fooled”

Investigative journalist and author Michael Shellenberger agrees, saying that “the totalitarianism we warned about is now happening”.

“The European Union is at this moment forcing big tech companies to secretly engage in mass censorship. Google and Facebook are, apparently, going along with it. Only Elon Musk’s X, among the major platforms, is resisting”, he writes.

“the EU is preparing to punish X with massive fines — up to 6% of total global revenue. I can’t imagine a more egregious form of foreign interference in our domestic affairs than foreign governments demanding mass secret censorship for ideological and political purposes”, he continues.

Shellenberger says that the “most terrifying” thing is how government intelligence and security services appear to be directly involved in demanding censorship – while those same governments warn daily of Russian censorship.

“Don’t be fooled by what is happening. Governments and former intelligence officials in Europe, Australia, Israel, Brazil, and Ukraine and other nations are not only demanding censorship but also often spreading their own disinformation”, he explains.

“We have to fight back”

He argues that the EU’s claims that there is more false information on X than on other, more heavily censored platforms are simply false. Rather, X has greater and broader freedom of expression, where discussion and dialogue are used “to give context to controversial content” – rather than bans and blocks.

“What the EU wants is for its committees of experts, not Community Notes, to secretly decide what we can read and say online. This is unethical and unconstitutional. Another key part of the EU’s disinformation is that “researchers” should have access to X’s internal data, which Musk cut off when he bought Twitter. But those people who want the data aren’t researchers. They’re censorship activists, many of whom have deep relationships with governments in general and intelligence agencies in particular”, he continues.

Schellenberger warns that if the EU succeeds in censoring X and the other major Internet platforms, there will be no freedom of expression – only government-controlled speech.

“Many people rightly worry about the implications of a single man, Elon Musk, being all that stands between us and foreign governments’ totalitarian censorship plans. I worry about that, too. Our speech is inalienable. It is not something governments give to us”.

“We need to fight back. While we should be grateful to Musk for standing up to the totalitarians in Europe, Brazil, and Australia, we must build a citizen’s movement to fight back”, the journalist urges.

TikTok can also be punished

It should also be noted that X is not the only platform that EU leaders want to punish and “bring into line”. China’s TikTok has long been accused of being a platform for spreading “disinformation” and “hate” and is being investigated to see if it too is in violation of the DSA – if so, it too risks being fined 6% of its global revenue.

In the past, governments in the US and EU have mainly relied on the major platforms to censor controversial and politically incorrect content – such as criticism of mass immigration, feminism, or the LGBTQ movement – on their own initiative, which has happened on a large scale on YouTube and Facebook, among others.

Recently, however, there seems to have been a partial shift in focus, with platforms being more explicitly forced to implement various forms of censorship – and threatened with penalties and fines if they refuse.

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…

Jewish Power leader: “Time to go full force into Gaza”

The situation in Gaza

Published 30 May 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Ben-Gvir has long been identified as one of Israel's most belligerent voices - and wants Gaza completely emptied of Palestinians.

Israel’s invasion and bombing of Gaza have been described as among the most extensive in modern times and condemned worldwide because of the high number of civilian casualties.

However, the country’s far-right security minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir, has long been one of the strongest voices calling for further escalation of the situation – now he is insisting that it is time for Israel to “go in with full force” into the already bombed-out territory.

Ben-Gvir, who also leads the Jewish Power (Otzma Yehudit) party, believes that Israel should take control of both Gaza and the West Bank and has been criticized over the years, even in Israel, for praising Jewish terrorists and mass murderers.

Itamar Ben-Gvir also caused a major uproar when he attended the so-called “wedding of hate” in 2015, where guests celebrated the murder of a Palestinian family in the village of Duma. At the wedding, participants waved weapons and stabbed knives into a picture of the 18-month-old boy who was killed in the arson attack – an act that Ben-Gvir had previously defended.

The number of Palestinians killed during Israel’s invasion and bombings is unclear – but is estimated to be between 40,000 and hundreds of thousands.

However, given that Hamas has said that the new US-backed ceasefire proposal does not meet their demands, Ben-Gvir believes that too much caution has been exercised so far and that it is now time to seriously use military force.

Mr. Prime Minister, after Hamas rejected the deal proposal again – there are no more excuses, Ben-Gvir said on his Telegram channel.

– The confusion, the shuffling and the weakness must end. We have already missed too many opportunities. It is time to go in with full force, without blinking, to destroy, and kill Hamas to the last one.

Ben-Gvir’s definition of terrorists who must be eliminated includes, according to him, not only combatants but also all Palestinians who are considered to sympathize with the Islamist group.

He has also previously argued that it is difficult to determine which Palestinians belong to Hamas and which do not, and he has repeatedly argued that Gaza should be permanently emptied of Palestinians.

Australian whistleblower loses court appeal – remains in prison

Published 30 May 2025
– By Editorial Staff
The documents leaked to the press by McBride showed, among other things, how Australian special forces executed unarmed Afghans.

Australian whistleblower David McBride will not have his prison sentence reduced. The Australian Capital Territory Court of Appeal ruled on Wednesday, rejecting McBride’s attempt to appeal the five-year and eight-month sentence he was handed down last year.

McBride, a former army lawyer, pleaded guilty to stealing and leaking classified documents about war crimes committed by Australian special forces in Afghanistan between 2005 and 2016. This information was then used as the basis for ABC’s high-profile investigation, The Afghan Files, in 2017.

In his appeal, McBride claimed that he had acted in the public interest, citing the oath he had sworn as a member of the military. However, the court rejected this argument and ruled that the oath actually obliged him to act “according to the law“.

– It is my own conscience and the people of Australia that I answer to. I have kept my oath to the Australian people, McBride said in a statement through his lawyers.

– People who have stood up for what is right in history have suffered far more than I have. … It is a great privilege to sacrifice for the country and I am confident the outrage produced by this judgment will be felt by all Australians. I will not give up.

“It can’t be illegal to tell the truth”

McBride can apply for parole after serving two years and three months, which means August 2025 at the earliest. However, his lawyer Eddie Lloyd says he will probably not be able to begin parole hearings until August 2026.

The decision has drawn criticism from rights groups and lawyers, who point out that McBride is the only person so far to be jailed over allegations of war crimes in Afghanistan. A 2020 military report recommended that 19 soldiers be investigated for 39 cases of suspected war crimes, but only one – Oliver Schulz – has been charged so far.

Australia’s most decorated soldier, Ben Roberts-Smith, recently lost a civil case that found he had killed four unarmed Afghans in violation of the laws of war, but he has not yet been charged.

It cannot be a crime to expose a crime. It cannot be illegal to tell the truth”, McBride’s lawyers wrote, announcing that they will now take the case to Australia’s highest court.

“Those who committed the crimes are walking free”

The lawyers are also calling on Justice Minister Michelle Rowland to pardon McBride. Her office declined to comment, but said it was considering further protections for whistleblowers in the public sector.

– David should never have spent a single day behind bars. Yet as we speak, he is returning to a cold, dark prison cell – preparing for winter in a concrete jungle – while those who committed crimes walk free and those who covered up those crimes have been rewarded with medals and promotions, Lloyd said.

The Nordic Times has previously reported on McBride’s case in connection with his prison sentence.

Merz: Defiant EU nations could be hit with economic punishment

The globalist agenda

Published 28 May 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Merz at the World Economic Forum in Davos earlier this year.

German Chancellor and former BlackRock executive Friedrich Merz is threatening to support a freeze on EU funding for Slovakia and Hungary if the countries continue to oppose EU leaders’ sanctions policy against Russia.

On Monday, Merz removed restrictions on Ukraine’s use of German long-range weapons deep inside Russia, a decision the Kremlin described as a “serious escalation”. Slovakia and Hungary have also taken a critical stance toward the West’s policy in the Ukraine war.

However, Merz does not appreciate the criticism and issued a clear warning to Bratislava and Budapest, stating that EU countries considered to be in breach of the rule of law could face infringement proceedings.

– Withdrawing European funds is always an option… If it is necessary, then we will deal with it, he added.

He also emphasized that “we cannot allow the decisions of the entire EU to depend on a small minority” and hinted that there could be “clearer words and possibly also harder conflicts” if the two countries do not change course.

“The end of democracy in Europe”

Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico and Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán have long criticized EU leaders for prolonging the war with military and economic support for Kiev without any visible progress.

Fico, who survived an assassination attempt in May 2024, has taken a more neutral stance than his predecessors since coming to power in 2023. Under his leadership, Slovakia has reduced its military support for Ukraine and promised to veto new EU sanctions that could damage the country’s economy. Fico has also visited Moscow twice since December to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin, which has sparked anger and criticism from both the EU and NATO.

The Slovak prime minister rejected Merz’s threat to withdraw funding and called the attack unacceptable.

– If someone wants to push a policy where only one opinion is allowed, that’s the end of democracy in Europe, he told reporters during a visit to Armenia on Tuesday.

“Not the path to unity and cooperation”

He argued that a policy where only one opinion is allowed is as dangerous for Europe as a third world war, and that German leaders must accept that not everyone shares their views.

Slovakia is not a little schoolchild that needs to be lectured. Slovakia’s sovereign positions do not stem from vanity, but are based on our national interests“, Fico stated, continuing:

When you hear such aggressive remarks, it feels like we are not heading into good times. The words of the German Chancellor are absolutely unacceptable in modern Europe. If we don’t obey, are we to be punished? This is not the path toward cohesion and cooperation”.

French parliament approves law legalizing euthanasia

Published 28 May 2025
– By Editorial Staff
In the 21st century, several European countries have chosen to legalize euthanasia or assisted suicide - and now France is next.

The French parliament has voted to legalize active euthanasia, allowing healthcare providers to help terminally ill patients end their lives.

The bill was approved by the National Assembly with 305 votes in favor and 199 against, while a separate law on the right to palliative care was passed unanimously.

The new law, called the “law on end of life”, is described by the government as “an ethical response to the need to support the sick and the suffering“. It allows medical teams to decide whether a patient can have access to a lethal substance, either through self-administration or with the help of healthcare professionals.

To qualify, the patient must be over 18, have French citizenship or residency, and suffer from a “serious and incurable, life-threatening, advanced or terminal illness” that causes “constant, unbearable physical or psychological suffering” without relief. The patient must also express their wishes freely and in an informed manner.

The proposal was supported by President Emmanuel Macron’s centrist MPs and the left, while conservative and nationalist parties opposed it.

Socialist MP Stéphane Delautrette called the decision “historic” and compared it to the introduction of abortion rights or the abolition of the death penalty.

– The French people are ready for this, and we owe them this rendezvous with history.

May come into force next year

However, Patrick Hetzel (Les Républicains) was not nearly as enthusiastic, warning of the risks of allowing assisted suicide.

– It is illusory to and even dangerous to even think of debating a legalization of euthanasia without having first fully deployed proper access to palliative care, he argued.

France has previously allowed passive euthanasia and deep sedation, but active euthanasia required travel to neighboring countries such as Switzerland. Although the parliament has given its approval, the law must now be reviewed by the Senate and return to the National Assembly, and is expected to come into force sometime next year at the earliest.

In countries such as the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Spain, and Portugal, active euthanasia is already permitted, and in Germany and Switzerland, physician-assisted suicide is permitted. In the UK, politicians will soon take a position on a bill to allow euthanasia.

Critics argue, however, that assisted suicide and active euthanasia risk undermining human dignity and opening up gray areas where vulnerable people, such as the elderly, the sick, or the disabled, may feel pressured or compelled to end their lives.

Risks becoming a quick and cheap solution

There are also warnings that legal certainty is lacking and that end-of-life care should be strengthened instead. Several experts have pointed out that access to palliative care is uneven and that euthanasia risks becoming a quick and cheap solution instead of offering relief, care, and support to those who need it most.

In several countries, euthanasia is not only provided to people with incurable and painful physical conditions, but also to those suffering from mental illness if this is considered to cause unbearable suffering.

Critics have pointed out, however, that mental illness is often treatable and that people in mental crisis need care and help to get better, rather than help to end their lives.

Experts have also emphasized that people suffering from deep depression or similar severe mental illness are not capable of making life-and-death decisions on their own, and that there is a real risk that mentally ill and highly vulnerable individuals will be pressured or persuaded to believe that death is the best option for them.

In Canada, where the rules are among the most liberal in the world, medically assisted dying accounted for nearly five percent of all deaths in the country in 2023.

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.