News

New Polish Surveillance Bill will Give Tusk Government Incredible Access to Citizens’ Private Data

New Polish Surveillance Bill will Give Tusk Government Incredible Access to Citizens’ Private Data

adminJun 14, 20242 min read

New Polish Surveillance Bill will Give Tusk Government Incredible Access to Citizens’ Private Data

Poland’s right-wing Confederation party has rung alarm bells over the scope of surveillance envisaged in the government’s telecommunications legislation.

The Polish parliament is in the process of debating a government telecommunications bill, which, according to the Confederation party, will endanger people’s right to privacy. The party has been warning since April that the proposed legislation is a reworking of a bill that the former Law and Justice (PiS) government proposed but recoiled from introducing. 

Confederation MP Roman Fritz said that the proposed legislation is ”introducing surveillance through the backdoor,” as it forces providers of services to maintain the capacity to store data to which 10 different state intelligence and law enforcement services have direct access.

The state services that would have such access include the police, border guards, the prison service, the Internal Security Agency (ABW), counterintelligence, the military police, and the Anti-Corruption Agency (CBA). 

“Thousands of officials will have the ability to conduct extensive surveillance of Poles and this is to be funded by telecoms service providers, which will mean a rise in the price of these services for the public,” said Fritz. 

Michał Urbaniak, another Confederation MP, pointed to the provision in the legislation, which would force the service providers to block people’s access to their email and social media messaging accounts and would oblige service providers to keep billing and geolocation data. This, argued the MP, would mean “blanket surveillance.”

Confederation has consistently argued for limiting powers of surveillance and data protection for private individuals. The party has submitted its legislative proposals, which only give state services access to personal data after obtaining a court order.


Breaking! Democrats File To Take Alex Jones’ X Account In Direct Attack Against America, Elon Musk, and President Trump


Court Rules ‘Success Kid’ Meme Use in Political Ad Does Not Qualify as Fair Use

Court Rules ‘Success Kid’ Meme Use in Political Ad Does Not Qualify as Fair Use

adminJun 14, 20243 min read
In appealing the ruling, the campaign argued copyright law’s fair use rule to defend the inclusion of the meme in a fundraising effort. Another argument was implied license.

When the Obama White House in 2013 used the “Success Kid” meme to promote, in posts on social media, the adoption of the Immigration Reform Bill – nobody clenched a fist, much less batted an eyelash to brand this PR strategy as a copyright violation.

However, the same can’t be said for the case of former Republican Congressman Steve King’s use of the meme (variations of which have been all over the internet for the past 15 or so years). But, when it made its way to one of King’s Facebook posts in 2020, the family of the child whose picture is used as a template sued on copyright grounds.

Court Rules ‘Success Kid’ Meme Use in Political Ad Does Not Qualify as Fair Use

And now a court has once again sided with their arguments. The “new rule” is that the image turned into a meme, when used in a political ad, does not fall under the fair use copyright exemption.

The mother of the child, Laney Griner, has no problem with the picture being used in other types of ads – the United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ruling notes that she took the photo in 2007, and after “Success Kid” became extremely popular, copyrighted it in 2012 to then license it to the likes of Virgin Mobile, Vitamin Water, Microsoft, and Coca-Cola, who used it in ads.

The original 2022 verdict in the case brought by Griner against King was that unlicensed use took place and that his campaign, but not the congressman himself, was guilty, and ordered them to pay $750.

In appealing the ruling, the campaign argued copyright law’s fair use rule to defend the inclusion of the meme in a fundraising effort. Another argument was implied license.

Now the court of appeals has found that the latter claim was abandoned during the original trial and, as for fair use – this was rejected based on the criteria the judges set for themselves to consider: whether the use was commercial, and “how much of the photo” was used.

Regarding other political campaigns (notably, the Obama administration pushing the immigration legislation), this latest decision saw the circuit judge agree with the trail judge that the evidence about the meme’s association with political ideas should not be considered.

We obtained a copy of the ruling for you here.


Breaking! Democrats File To Take Alex Jones’ X Account In Direct Attack Against America, Elon Musk, and President Trump


Monstrous Massachusetts Bill Would Allow Moms to Sell Their Unborn Children to the Highest Bidder

Monstrous Massachusetts Bill Would Allow Moms to Sell Their Unborn Children to the Highest Bidder

adminJun 14, 20247 min read

Monstrous Massachusetts Bill Would Allow Moms to Sell Their Unborn Children to the Highest Bidder

The Parentage Equality Bill redefines parenthood ‘on the basis of a ‘person’s intent to be a parent of a child,’ and ‘in doing so, it strips all mention of mothers and fathers from parentage law, replacing these vital familial roles with gender-erased language.’

(LifeSiteNews) — The Massachusetts’s House of Representatives just voted unanimously to pass a monstrous bill that would, ostensibly, allow women to sell their unborn children to the highest bidder.

The measure commodifies women and allows children to be treated as nothing more than chattel — as items to be sold — although none of the legislators are saying that out loud.

Known as the “Parentage Equality Bill,” or H.4672, the Act devilishly banishes the immutable truth that children should be raised in a loving home by their biological parents while obliterating the terms “mother” and “father,” trading them out for “person who gives birth” and “other parent,” or “genetic source.” Even the pronoun “his” is dumped in favor of a more ambiguous, non-gendered “their.”

The Act is written as if the complementarity of the sexes were an outdated social construct.

This bill redefines parenthood “on the basis of a ‘person’s intent to be a parent of a child,’” noted Patience Griswold of Them Before Us (TBU), an organization devoted to protecting children’s rights, writing at The Federalist.  “In doing so, it strips all mention of mothers and fathers from parentage law, replacing these vital familial roles with gender-erased language.”

Sponsors say the bill will protect relationships between parents and children, but in reality it protects the rights of parents who obtain children through surrogacy. And many, if not most, of those parents will be homosexual men.

As such, while purporting to protect relationships between parents and children, the bill untethers the all-important, irreplaceable relationship every child has for his or her mother, completely disregarding that universal longing.

Apparently not a single legislator was troubled by the content or intent of the bill, which passed 156-0. It will now advance to the Massachusetts Senate.

It’s unsurprising that this measure is making its way through the Massachusetts legislature. After all, the Bay State was the first to embrace the impossible notion of same-sex “marriage” back in 2004, and its Supreme Court ruled more than three decades ago that same-sex partners could adopt kids.

Griswold describes the very thin line the proposed law creates between “parentage equality” and outright baby-selling:

In any other circumstance, if a woman accepts money in exchange for handing over her parental claim on her child, she has engaged in baby-selling. Under this bill, she can do exactly that if she has secured a valid surrogacy contract, even if she makes the arrangement with the purchasing parents after she has become pregnant, providing the contract is validated before the child is born.

Under H. 4672, the following would be perfectly legal: a woman undergoes the physical and mental health screenings required to become a surrogate, becomes pregnant via sperm from a sperm bank, and then posts to a surrogacy forum or social media group that she is not only available as a surrogate but already pregnant.

She could then choose to “match” with the couple willing to pay the highest “payment of consideration,” essentially auctioning off her child. As long as the surrogacy agreement meets the requirements outlined in the bill, it could be validated by a court and viewed as not only permissible but legally binding. However, if that same woman became pregnant and decided to make an agreement with a couple to adopt her child, while insisting that she be paid for placing her child with them, she would be prosecuted for baby selling.

After Wednesday’s vote, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) issued a gleeful report on the passage of the legislation, focusing solely on the increased legal rights for LGBT-identifying individuals whose sexual relationships are 100% unable to produce children naturally while ignoring the erosion of the rights of children who might be purchased or otherwise obtained via the measure.

“What we are doing today is giving a tune up to our statutory structure to reflect the modern and contemporary ways that people become parents whether they are straight or gay,” said House Rep. Sarah Peake, a Democrat from Provincetown, New England’s gay Mecca.

“At the heart of this bipartisan legislation lies a simple yet profound principle: The recognition of legal parentage should not be contingent upon outdated norms or narrow definitions,” Rep. Hannah Kane, a Republican co-sponsor of the bill, said during her floor speech Wednesday. “It is a principle that acknowledges the diverse tapestry of modern families and affirms their right to legal recognition and protection under the law.”

In other words, children’s rights are being eroded in order to accommodate the desire of homosexuals who demand to experience parenthood. The “tapestry” Kane refers to is woven with garish rainbow colors; and the so-called “outdated norms or narrow definitions” refer to those that are based on the supreme truth regarding the complementarity of man and woman.

Perhaps the most truthful statement came from Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell, who admitted that the bill is meant to advance “reproductive and LGBTQ+ rights.”

“Our state parental laws have not kept pace with the diversity of modern-day families, and as other states take the necessary steps to protect families, provide stability for children and advance reproductive and LGBTQ+ rights, it is clear it is well past the time for us to act and pass the Massachusetts Parentage Act,” Campbell said.

Headlines from local media didn’t obscure the meaning of the law the way Massachusetts politicos did.

“Updated Parentage Act, which guarantees equal rights for LGBTQ+ parents, passes in the House,” blared one headline, while another admitted “Mass. House votes to expand the definition of ‘parent.’”

The legislation was supported by a vast array of LGBTQ+ and “reproductive rights” organizations, including the LGBT Washington, D.C. lobbying powerhouse, The Human Rights Campaign (HRC), Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, and Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Law and Public Policy.

Many of the supporting organizations profit from IVF and surrogacy procedures, which deny the dignity — and often end the lives — of unborn children.

“Reproductive equity is not a reality in Massachusetts until every individual — and every LGBTQ+ family — is able to make decisions about whether and when to parent, and to parent with dignity,” Reproductive Equity Now president Rebecca Hart Holder said in a statement. “This bill will protect family formation in a post-Dobbs world, ensure that LGBTQ+ parents have the protections they need to start or build their families.”

“Children have a right to be born free, not bought and sold. No amount of saccharine wording can mask the fact that the ‘Parentage Equality’ bill monetizes women’s bodies and turns children into products,” TBU’s Griswold concluded. “The women and children of Massachusetts deserve better.”


Breaking! Democrats File To Take Alex Jones’ X Account In Direct Attack Against America, Elon Musk, and President Trump


US Navy SEALs Engage in LGBTQIAAP2S+ ‘Pride Prancing’ on Social Media as Nuclear World War Looms

US Navy SEALs Engage in LGBTQIAAP2S+ ‘Pride Prancing’ on Social Media as Nuclear World War Looms

adminJun 14, 20244 min read

US Navy SEALs Engage in LGBTQIAAP2S+ ‘Pride Prancing’ on Social Media as Nuclear World War Looms

In preparation for nuclear war with Russia, the US Military has come out as gay.

The elite Navy SEALs division of the United States military, long considered to be one of the most well-respected fighting forces in the world, has gone woke by joining the LGBT Pride mob.

Not long before the Biden regime’s Department of Defense (DoD) blasted Pride colors and flags all across social media, the official Navy SEALs social media accounts did the exact same thing in celebration of Pride.

While much of corporate America has toned down its Pride Month festivities due to massive public backlash, the U.S. military is forging onward in pushing perversion and degeneracy on the masses.

According to the U.S. military, “lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer” (LGBTQ) lifestyles deserve to be celebrated. The U.S. armed forces consider all of these sexual appetites to constitute “Dignity, Service, Respect and Equality.”

(Related: Remember back in 2018 when former Navy SEAL Tej Gill stated publicly that two-time failed presidential wannabe Hillary Clinton “killed my friends?”)

Facebook users respond to Navy’s Pride push

As has been happening a lot in recent years, the social media-sphere was really upset after the U.S. Naval Special Warfare Command account on Facebook did a digital LGBT Pride prance for the world to see.

Not long after the unit unleashed a torrent of six-colored “rainbow” posts in promotion of Pride, the official account limited its responses due to massive public backlash.

One post received 370 ridiculing “Laugh” emoji responses, along with 350 “Angry” reactions. Comparatively, there were less than 200 positive responses to the post, which in the social media world is referred to as a “ratio.”

“This is a slap in the face of every special warfare operator that has put their lives on the line for our nation,” commented someone named John Jeacopello in response to the post.

“I know plenty of current and former SEALs who are disgusted with this,” said another, named Luke Pierson. “Please repent of this debaucherous behavior and stick to what you’re good at.”

Another person named Owen Merton wrote that this “woke s*** … is like a cancer and needs to be handled and dealt with as a threat to national security.”

“Gone way too far,” Merton added.

Another person named Arcides Cruz who claims to have once served in the U.S. armed forces expressed thankfulness to no longer be in the military today.

“So glad I got out before this b******* took over,” Cruz added.

Conservative commentator Todd Starnes wrote an article of his own that explained the tone deafness of the Navy in promoting such filth.

“One of the greatest concerns among veterans and active duty servicemembers is the wokeness that has infected nearly every branch of the service,” Starnes wrote. “Instead of raising up fierce defenders of freedom, the woke Pentagon is raising up an army of social justice warriors.”

“Our enemies are laughing at us, America.”

Despite all this backlash, the DoD proceeded to post a pro-Pride message on X that just like the Navy’s Facebook post drew ire from the world of social media.

The DoD post called for the American public to “come together to honor the contributions of LGBTQ+ service members,” adding that the U.S. military is committed to “ensuring and promoting an atmosphere of dignity and respect for all civilian and military personnel.”

At least 7,000 people commented on the post, which only had about 1,500 “Likes.” This, too, is an example of being ratioed, meaning the post in question is wildly unpopular.

“If anyone is wondering why they keep posting this despite the fact that we all hate it, it’s because this is a Regime humiliation tactic,” commented Pete D’Abrosca about the DoD’s pro-Pride post.

“They know we can’t do anything about it so they’re flipping us the bird.”

There is nothing about LGBT to be proud of. Learn more at Gender.news.


Breaking! Democrats File To Take Alex Jones’ X Account In Direct Attack Against America, Elon Musk, and President Trump


Russia’s Stock Market Stops Trading In Dollars and Euros

Russia’s Stock Market Stops Trading In Dollars and Euros

adminJun 14, 20241 min read

Russia’s Stock Market Stops Trading In Dollars and Euros

The Moscow stock exchange announced on Wednesday that it will stop trading in dollars and euros. The announcement came on the same day that the United States introduced a new package of sanctions against Russia […]

The post Russia’s Stock Market Stops Trading In Dollars and Euros appeared first on The People’s Voice.

Bank Of Israel Pushes Digital Shekel

Bank Of Israel Pushes Digital Shekel

adminJun 14, 20241 min read

Bank Of Israel Pushes Digital Shekel

Israel is pushing forward with the digital shekel initiative to accelerate the development of its central bank digital currency (CBDC). The Bank of Israel (BoI) will be collaborating with a range of service providers to […]

The post Bank Of Israel Pushes Digital Shekel appeared first on The People’s Voice.