By Andrew Barr, Guest Writer&nbsp;On 7th December last year, the Conservative Member of Parliament (MP) Andrew Bridgen asked the Prime Minister Rishi Sunak a question about COVID vaccines during Prime Minister’s Question Time, a weekly event that is attended by the vast majority of the 650 members of the House of Commons. The government body in charge of regulating medicines had just approved the extension of COVID vaccines to children as young as six months old. Bridgen asked Sunak whether, in the light of the many reports of deaths and adverse effects caused by the vaccines, he would overturn this recommendation. Sunak replied that he would not, since the vaccines were ‘safe and effective’. &nbsp;This was not the first time that vaccine harms had been mentioned in Parliament, but it was a subject the government had gone out of its way to avoid discussing.&nbsp;Bridgen followed up a week later by organizing his own parliamentary debate on the subject of vaccine damage, which was attended by maybe half a dozen other MPs. Bridgen made a lengthy speech in which he called for the immediate suspension of the vaccination program. He offered a good deal of evidence to support his case. Replying on behalf of the government, the junior health minister Maria Caulfield did not address the substance of any of Bridgen’s arguments but instead accused him of “deriding doctors, scientists and nurses.” She not only insisted that the vaccines were “safe and effective” but also claimed (without providing any evidence for her assertion) that they had “saved thousands of lives”. &nbsp;By his insistence on talking about vaccine harms, Bridgen was posing a major inconvenience to the government of which he was still nominally a member. He followed up his speech in Parliament with interviews on several alternative media podcasts. Asked in one of them (by James Delingpole) why he had not spoken out about vaccine damage before now, Bridgen explained, “I guess I didn’t want to believe that we were all being lied to; it does change your perspective on the world.” Also, he said he could no longer remain silent now that they had decided to extend the vaccines to babies. He told another interviewer (the Rev. Jamie Franklin) that he believed that he would not be allowed to remain in Parliament much longer, that some means would be found to get rid of him well before the next general election. &nbsp;After the break for Christmas and New Year, on 11th January Bridgen tweeted that an (unnamed) consultant cardiologist had described the COVID vaccine program as “the biggest crime against humanity since the Holocaust.” By lunchtime that day the Conservative Party had responded to Bridgen’s remarks by “removing the whip," which meant that he was now an independent MP and no longer a representative of the Conservative Party. At Prime Minister’s Question Time, Matt Hancock, who had been Health Secretary during the COVID panic and had been personally in charge of the vaccination campaign, asked the Prime Minister about Bridgen’s “disgusting, antisemitic, anti-vax conspiracy theories” which he claimed were “not only deeply offensive but anti-scientific.” Prime Minister Sunak agreed, adding — in an apparent non sequitur — that he was “determined that the scourge of antisemitism is eradicated; it has absolutely no place in our society.” It appeared from their comments that Hancock and Sunak were seeking to conflate antisemitism with criticism of the vaccine programme. &nbsp;As did spokespeople for other political parties. For example, Daisy Cooper, who speaks on health matters for the Liberal Democratic Party, described Bridgen’s comments as "truly revolting" and “dangerous misinformation. Wild conspiracy theories and incredibly offensive comparisons to the Holocaust have no place in British society.”As did spokespeople for Jewish organizations. Karen Pollock, Chief Executive of the Holocaust Educational Trust, stated that she found it “appalling . . . for these horrors to be co-opted by anti-vaxxers.” Mark Gardner, Chief Executive of the Community Security Trust said that Bridgen’s remarks were a “repulsive, hurtful and idiotic comparison to make.”Yet Bridgen had not in fact compared vaccine harms with the Holocaust; what he said was that the vaccination campaign was the biggest crime since the Holocaust. He held up the Holocaust as the ultimate example of the worst crimes perpetrated in the last eighty years. Furthermore, in making his statement Bridgen was quoting the words of an (unnamed) “consultant cardiologist,” and referencing the academic research of a social scientist at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem called Josh Guetzkow — an Israeli Jew. Asked about Bridgen’s comments by the Daily Sceptic, Guetzkow replied that he was “surprised” by the outcry, because “there is nothing at all antisemitic about his statement.” &nbsp;One could argue that Bridgen was foolish ever to have mentioned the Holocaust, because it gave his enemies the ammunition with which to shoot him. But it is clear that the accusations of antisemitism were made specifically in order to silence someone who was asking awkward questions about the vaccine program, and to send a message to any other MP who might be thinking of following suit that he too would be smeared and cast out as Bridgen had been. &nbsp;The Bridgen story has been widely reported. As yet, no commentator appears to have noticed, or at least to have mentioned, a very close parallel with the recent history of Britain’s other main political party, the Labour Party, and its suspension of its two most prominent left-wing MPs, Ken Livingstone and Jeremy Corbyn. &nbsp;In 2015, the Labour Party had lost a general election to the Conservatives. Labour had been led into the election by Ed Milliband, a non-practicing Jew, who resigned following the defeat. In the leadership election that followed, the party chose a previously obscure left-wing “backbench” MP, Jeremy Corbyn. This choice surprised a great many people, including Corbyn himself. &nbsp;Corbyn, who might reasonably be described as an “old-school socialist,” became the most left-wing leader of the Labour Party since the Second World War. His election to the leadership caused a great deal of consternation among the mainstream “Blairite” wing of the party. When Tony Blair had been elected Labour leader in 1994 he created a “New Labour” movement explicitly in opposition to Corbyn’s style of old-fashioned socialism that had contributed to Labour’s failure to win a general election for twenty years. “New Labour” was conceived as a kind of Labour-lite that would not scare the middle classes and thus render the party electable. It worked. Under Blair’s leadership, Labour won three successive elections by a large margin.&nbsp;Now in 2015, with the election of Jeremy Corbyn, the socialists had taken back control. Having spent many years struggling to eliminate the “hard left” from the party, the Blairites were not prepared to take this result lying down. They looked for weaknesses that they might be able to exploit. &nbsp;One potential area of weakness was the obsession of many of Corbyn’s supporters on the “hard left” with the cause of the Palestinian people and their opposition to the State of Israel. The advocacy of many Labour left-wingers for the Palestinians, over and above all other marginalized peoples worldwide, was considered by many Jews to be antisemitic, since one definition of “antisemitism” is to hold the State of Israel to higher standards than other countries, to single it out for criticism that is not levied against anyone else. &nbsp;Furthermore, hostility among Labour left-wingers to the State of Israel has spilled over in some cases into hostility towards Jews in general. There is no doubt that many British Jews felt uncomfortable about Corbyn’s leadership of the Labour Party, and that some Jewish MPs suffered antisemitic abuse from party members. &nbsp;Corbyn himself had been careless in the manner in which he had expressed his support for the Palestinian cause, to the extent of having described as his “friends” the Palestinian militant group Hamas and the Lebanon-based Hezbollah — both of which had officially been designated as “terrorist organizations”. &nbsp;Here was a weapon the Blairites could use against Corbyn and his allies. &nbsp;In the spring of 2016, the well-known left-wing Labour MP Ken Livingstone, former Mayor of London, and a long-term associate of Corbyn, appeared on the BBC to defend another MP (Naz Shah) who has been suspended from the Labour Party on account of some remarks she had made about Israel two years earlier, before she became an MP. As part of his defence of Shah, Livingstone claimed that Adolf Hitler had supported Zionism before he “went mad and ended up killing six million Jews.” The suggestion that Hitler had originally supported Zionism is a theory that has found support among a few historians; I would not personally agree with it, but I do not see how it is antisemitic. Nevertheless, Livingstone was asked by the party hierarchy to apologise for his remarks. He refused, saying he was “not sorry for telling the truth.” Livingstone was therefore suspended from the Labour Party. He remained unrepentant. “If you look at what this is all about,” he said, “it is not about antisemitism in the Labour Party. . . . What this is all about is actually the struggle of the embittered old Blairite MPs to try to get rid of Jeremy Corbyn.” Two years later, still under threat of expulsion, Livingstone decided instead to resign from the party of which he had been a member for half a century. &nbsp;Under Corbyn’s leadership, the Labour Party performed much better in the 2017 general election than had been expected. This may well have displeased the Blairites. Until now they had merely been concerned that the party was moving back towards socialism; this might have threatened their control of the organization, but they had no reason to suppose that a campaign on this platform would ever win an election. But now there was the genuine possibility of a Corbyn-led government. Many Blairites felt more threatened by the prospect of a socialist government than by the prospect of a Conservative one. Even more reason to seek to smear Corbyn and his supporters as “antisemites”. &nbsp;In an interview with the left-wing Labour website The Canary, the American Jewish academic Norman Finkelstein (author of The Holocaust Industry) claimed that there was a “criminal cabal trying to oust the democratically elected leader of the Labour Party. . . . The whole British elite has decided that they’re going to use this antisemitism card to stop Jeremy Corbyn and the political insurgency he represents. . . . The problem is, even when you win, you lose. Even if you can prove everything is a lie, there’s always the assumption “where there’s smoke, there must be fire.” But that’s not the bigger problem. The bigger problem is that it’s sucking so much energy from the Corbyn campaign that he can’t talk about his platform. All the headlines are about the antisemitism issue.” &nbsp;The next general election was held in December 2019. It is impossible to say how much effect the question of antisemitism had on the result. But it cannot have helped the Labour Party that several Jewish Labour MPs had resigned before the election because of antisemitism or perceived antisemitism, and were even explicitly encouraging members of the public to vote Conservative. Labour lost by a wide margin. Corbyn announced that he would resign the leadership. &nbsp;In the spring of 2020 a new Labour leadership election was held, and Corbyn was replaced by the mainstream Keir Starmer. In the autumn, the results of an investigation into antisemitism in the Labour Party were published. Corbyn accepted its finding that there was a problem of antisemitism within the Labour Party, but stated, “The scale of the problem was also dramatically overstated for political reasons by our opponents inside and outside the party.” Starmer responded that those who believed that the issue of antisemitism had been “exaggerated” or was a “factional attack” were also “part of the problem” and “should be nowhere near the Labour Party.” Corbyn was suspended. The Blairites had won. Jeremy Corbyn, like Andrew Bridgen, now sits in Parliament as an independent MP. &nbsp;In the cases of Ken Livingstone and Jeremy Corbyn, just like that of Andrew Bridgen, accusations of antisemitism have been used as a weapon in order to get rid of a prominent politician who was embarrassing his political party for another, completely different reason. Antisemitism has been weaponised.&nbsp;The victims of the weaponization of antisemitism are not limited to politicians whose presence their political parties, or their opponents within these parties, have found to be an inconvenience. The victims also include those Jewish organizations who believe that they are performing a service on behalf of their own community by speaking out to condemn antisemitism wherever they imagine they have found it; who are speaking out against Bridgen, and who spoke out against Corbyn and Livingstone before him. These organizations do not appear to understand that they are being used as patsies by the political establishment. No politician who accuses his rivals of being “antisemitic” has any real interest in combatting antisemitism, in protecting Jewish people from abuse or Jewish communities from threats of violence.&nbsp;It could also be argued that exploiting in this way the long-standing Jewish fear of persecution is in itself a form of antisemitism, since it makes Jews afraid. Incessant stories in the media during the Corbyn leadership suggesting that the Labour Party was full of their enemies made many Jews so fearful of the prospect of a Labour government that they even started thinking about leaving the country. A poll in the Jewish Chronicle in 2018 found that nearly 40% of British Jews would seriously consider emigrating if Corbyn became Prime Minister. &nbsp;Among the general public, the effect of bogus accusations of antisemitism may have the opposite effect. The more noise that is made about supposed antisemitism when a big noise is simply not warranted, the more likely it becomes that people will simply stop listening to you, that when a real antisemitic incident occurs, nobody will pay any attention. The principle of the “boy who cried wolf”. &nbsp;Furthermore, the more that politicians and the mainstream media try to browbeat the public into paying attention to their narrative of antisemitism and “Holocaust denial,” the more members of the public will come to the conclusion that the existence of antisemitism and even the story of the Holocaust are no more than confected narratives, designed for the purpose of silencing debate. In other words, making a noise about antisemitism and Holocaust denial will actually end up by increasing the number of antisemites and Holocaust deniers. I have seen this happen personally, within the “freedom movement”. &nbsp;Maybe this serves the intention of those propagandists who have weaponized antisemitism and Holocaust denial. Maybe they actually want to increase the spread of antisemitism and Holocaust denial, not least within the freedom movement, because then they can accuse all those people who oppose them of being antisemites and Holocaust deniers. Maybe it is all part of a policy of “divide and rule”. &nbsp;The propagandists certainly know that most people, and most politicians are in a difficult position politically if they try to counter these accusations, because they then run the risk of being themselves labelled as "antisemites". &nbsp;Which is where my organization — Jews for Justice — comes into play. We are all Jews, many of whom have lost family members in the Holocaust. Nobody can reasonably accuse us of being antisemitic or denying the Holocaust. We have made it our role to call out fraudulent accusations of antisemitism that seek to exploit the prejudice to which Jews have historically been subjected. It is our job to say, ‘We know what you are up to, and we are not buying it. We will not allow you to hijack our history, and our tragedy, for your own nefarious ends. Not in our name.’&nbsp;Jews for Justice is a group of British Jews committed to the cause of freedom, who meet in person in North London and also on-line on Telegram. Anyone who is interested in joining is welcome to email Andrew Barr at <a href="mailto:jewsforjustice@protonmail.com">jewsforjustice@protonmail.com</a>. &nbsp;Andrew Barr has written books on wine (‘Wine Snobbery’) and on the history of drink (‘Drink: a social history’). He is working on a history of scapegoating, provisionally entitled ‘The Enemy Within’. &nbsp;

iStock-1384557015.jpg

World News

Jews for Justice head calls out 'fraudulent antisemitism accusations that seek to exploit prejudice'

Weaponizing antisemitism

<h2>Move over book burning, hello de-platforming?</h2>Closed out of your Facebook or Instagram account? Maybe your website suddenly disappeared, or your YouTube channel was demonetized or deleted? Perhaps you lost access to thousands of hours of posts and videos you produced, and your years of work were gone in an instant? That's de-platforming; the modern version of book burning, a “punishment” for going against the mainstream narrative. And, the censorship doesn't stop with social media, it includes PayPal accounts and more.<h3>Getting up again</h3>How do individuals who went afoul of the globalists, who didn't keep quiet and let others do their thinking for them, respond when they find themselves de-platformed by social media companies and other services? Here's what London Real's Brian Rose, Americas Frontline Doctor founder Dr. Simone Gold, and independent researcher James Roguski did to pick themselves up and continue their work despite the heavy-handed censorship they experienced.Brian RoseWhen London Real YouTuber Brian Rose publicly began trying to understand COVID-19 and its countermeasures, he soon found his entire life seemingly deleted from the internet by the social media giants.&nbsp;Not only did he lose all his years of work, amounting to thousands of videos which he had uploaded to the internet. He also lost access to his Paypal account, and more, because in his search for the truth about the pandemic; his counter-narrative interviews with David Icke were too dangerous for the globalists to allow. &nbsp;In his below documentary, Rose&nbsp;recounts his experiences and how he ultimately started a channel of his own. He explains that he was wholly unprepared for what happened on May 3, 2020, even though he knew that many would want to stop the interview (@about 3:36):<blockquote>Over the past few weeks, our entire world has been transformed. Everything we took for granted has now been taken away and our freedoms have been replaced with fear. All those rights we fought centuries for have been handed over without a second thought.&nbsp;We all process fear in different ways. I cope by immersing myself in my work and today my job is to ask questions. One million people will be watching and they all want answers.&nbsp;Countless others are trying to stop this from happening. At any moment they can walk through that door or lock this broadcast. I'm scared but I don't know what else to do. I prepared my whole life for a moment like This. But nothing would prepare me for what happened next. . .</blockquote>&nbsp;<div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">WATCH THE MOVIE THAT YouTube DOES NOT Want YOU TO SEE (and SHARE IT Far And Wide ) <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/LondonReal?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#LondonReal</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/WeWillNotBeSilenced?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#WeWillNotBeSilenced</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/StopCensorship?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#StopCensorship</a> <a href="https://t.co/txcVpjPDWz">https://t.co/txcVpjPDWz</a>— Brian Rose, Founder &amp; Host of London Real (@LondonRealTV) <a href="https://twitter.com/LondonRealTV/status/1796285778517221575?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 30, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>&nbsp;Dr. Simone GoldDr. Simone Gold, founder of <a href="https://www.aflds.org" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">America's Frontline Doctors</a>, was one of the first doctors to understand that how she was being told to treat COVID patients wasn't normal. Very alarmed at what was taking place she, along with other doctors, held the “<a href="https://www.whitecoatsummit.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">White Coat Summit</a>” on July 27, 2020, as well as a press conference on the Supreme Court steps. As she tweeted below, the press conference went viral, garnering millions of views before Big Tech and Big Media took the video down.She concluded by explaining their purpose and the result:<blockquote>Our fight was to show America the propaganda vs the truth, and then we were censored.</blockquote>&nbsp;<div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Our press conference in front of the Supreme Court on July 27th, 2020 was a turning point in the fight against COVID Tyranny. After 20 million views in 8 hours, Big Tech colluded to wipe the video from online platforms. We knew in this moment that we would win the fight. <a href="https://t.co/9CP0Ogpnfp">pic.twitter.com/9CP0Ogpnfp</a>— Dr. Simone Gold (@drsimonegold) <a href="https://twitter.com/drsimonegold/status/1610416861723729921?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 3, 2023</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>Dr. Gold continues to <a href="https://aflds.org/about-us" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">advance</a> the mission of America's Frontline Doctors, to protect medical freedom and civil liberties.'James RoguskiIndependent researcher James Roguski who, <a href="http://jamesroguski.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">according</a> to his website, has been calling out lies and propaganda for decades, found years of work gone when the company that hosted most of his websites terminated his account for what they said were “terms of service” violations. It did not deter him from continuing his work, either.<blockquote>They deleted many of my websites, but they ignited my passion to burn even brighter. I now have most of my work on Substack.&nbsp;</blockquote>Roguski is interested in building a holistic alternative to the WHO and <a href="https://jamesroguski.substack.com/about" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">recruits</a> others to join him.<blockquote>The old system is crumbling, and I intend to help speed its demise, but we must build its replacement quickly.If you are fed up with the government, hospital, medical, pharmaceutical, media, industrial complex and would like to help , then feel free to contact me directly anytime.</blockquote>&nbsp;The information contained in this article is for educational and information purposes only and is not intended as health, medical, financial or legal advice. Always consult a physician, lawyer or other qualified professional regarding any questions you may have about a medical condition, health objectives, or legal issues.&nbsp;Related articles:<ul><li><a href="https://frontline.news/post/covid-sceptics-won-out-globalists-fear-an-increasingly-disbelieving-public" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">'COVID skeptics won out' — Globalists fear an increasingly disbelieving public</a></li><li><a href="https://frontline.news/post/colorado-governor-signs-off-on-bill-establishing-state-ministry-of-truth-students-atarget-of-new-law">Colorado governor signs off on bill establishing state 'ministry of truth'? Students a target of new law</a></li></ul>

account suspended.jpg

Censorship

Globalism

How three individuals got up again after being de-platformed

Who's afraid of Big Bad Tech? 

A British vigilante group known as the “Blade Runners” is receiving widespread support from British taxpayers as it continues to destroy climate surveillance cameras across London.<h2>The ULEZ mandate</h2>By order of London Mayor Sadiq Khan, the city is peppered with ultra-low emission zones (ULEZs), areas accessible only to low-emission vehicles. Cars that do not meet the city’s environmental standards are charged £12.50 ($16) for entering the ULEZ. Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras positioned around the zones read license plates and check them against the vehicles’ make and model in real time. If a vehicle does not meet the environmental threshold, a fine is levied against the car owner.&nbsp;The ULEZ climate mandate has drawn heavy&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/london-hundreds-protest-against-climate-mandates">protests</a> from residents, including&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/british-veteran-launches-hunger-strike-as-unrest-grows-over-climate-mandates">hunger strikes</a> and refusals to pay fines. Taxpayers have also taken to disabling the ANPR surveillance cameras which Transport for London (TfL), the city’s transportation department, said will be used both for climate and law enforcement.<h2>Taxpayers cheer the ‘Blade Runners’</h2>Since the climate restrictions were expanded last year, the Blade Runners have taken to disabling and destroying hundreds of cameras. Between April and September 2023, Metropolitan Police recorded 200 reports of cameras being stolen and 595 reports of cameras being vandalized.TfL began placing black boxes around ULEZ camera wirings to protect them from being cut, but taxpayers found other ways to disable the cameras — like removing them completely.<div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560"> MUST SEE: Blade Runners topple THREE ULEZ cameras in a coordinated strike… The people are fighting back! <a href="https://t.co/Yvr2Xr7Lun">pic.twitter.com/Yvr2Xr7Lun</a>— David Morgan #StayFree (@david_r_morgan) <a href="https://twitter.com/david_r_morgan/status/1802726912050995623?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 17, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>In response, the city&nbsp;<a href="https://frontline.news/post/london-taxpayers-attack-surveillance-vans-in-continued-revolt">deployed</a> mobile surveillance vans mounted with ANPR cameras across London in the hopes of evading attacks, but Blade Runners soon began targeting those as well. Some surveillance vans have been spotted covered in graffiti with their tires slashed, while others have been completely covered in tarp.Last month, 21 cameras were destroyed in the hours after Sadiq Khan was re-elected mayor of London, the&nbsp;Daily Mail&nbsp;<a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13538797/Moment-Blade-Runner-uses-power-tool-cut-ULEZ-camera-traffic-light-latest-attack-Sadiq-Khans-hated-scheme.html">reported</a>. Last weekend, Blade Runners used power tools to topple a ULEZ camera and traffic lights to the delight of some fellow taxpayers. In a video that was posted to social media, passing cars can be heard honking in support.The video received over 37,000 likes. Comments on the post were largely supportive, with users writing that, “When tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty,” and “Fair play to them, it's a complete scam that does nothing.”Blade Runner Matt Hardy told the&nbsp;Daily Mail&nbsp;that the Blade Runners are “people pissed off about the tyranny reigning over us and getting out and doing things about it – real votes, real boys here.”<h2>‘These cameras are not about the climate. They are about control’</h2>British actor and influencer Laurence Fox said this week he was just given back his electronic devices by police after being arrested earlier this year for cheering on the Blade Runners:<blockquote>These cameras are not about the climate. They are about control. They are the primary infrastructure for all sorts of things that ideologues like the midget dictator [Sadiq Khan] would like to impose upon us.I can now finally say the word ‘Bladerunners’ again. One of the ridiculous restrictions on free speech imposed by the police.It’s a dreadful shame to see so many of these cameras dying suddenly. I’m not at all thrilled about it. Just because I am smiling like a Cheshire Cat, it doesn’t mean that I am over the moon that these scameras continue to topple in high winds.&nbsp;Vive la résistance!</blockquote><div class="raw-html-embed"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet">POLICE UPDATE Following 6 coppers bursting into my house earlier this year to arrest me for saying how pleased I was that the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ULEZ?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#ULEZ</a> scam was meeting such robust resistance, this morning the <a href="https://twitter.com/metpoliceuk?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@metpoliceuk</a> were ordered by the magistrate to hand back all my devices, including my…— Laurence Fox (@LozzaFox) <a href="https://twitter.com/LozzaFox/status/1803030521095622912?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 18, 2024</a></blockquote> <script async="" src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div> &nbsp;

ulez sign camera.jpg

Pushback_Resistance

Climate Change

‘Pissed off about the tyranny reigning over us’

British taxpayers cheer vigilante group destroying climate cams

Fisker is filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, the electric vehicle (EV) company announced Tuesday.<h2>‘Like other companies in the electric vehicle industry’</h2>“Fisker has made incredible progress since our founding, bringing the Ocean SUV to market twice as fast as expected in the auto industry and making good on our promises to deliver the most sustainable vehicle in the world,” a spokesperson <a href="https://assets.ctfassets.net/cghen8gr8e1n/6W19OiEBJDVIFVEmo4feHA/df902c5cb2b067251a300efb0b35f611/Fisker-Filing-FINAL.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">said</a>.The California-based company added it is not the only EV maker that has been struggling to stay in business.“We are proud of our achievements, and we have put thousands of Fisker Ocean SUVs in customers’ hands in both North American [sic] and Europe. But like other companies in the electric vehicle industry, we have faced various market and macroeconomic headwinds that have impacted our ability to operate efficiently. After evaluating all options for our business, we determined that proceeding with a sale of our assets under Chapter 11 is the most viable path forward for the company.”Fisker’s collapse is the latest indication that the EV industry is folding due to sinking demand. Other EV industry players are also cutting their losses as they jump ship.<h2>Hertz</h2>In March, Hertz CEO Stephen Scherr&nbsp;<a href="https://www.motorfinanceonline.com/news/hertz-ceo-resigns-amid-ev-investment-setback/#:~:text=Scherr's%20departure%20coincides%20with%20Hertz's,electric%20vehicle%20(EV)%20rentals">resigned</a> after his bet on EVs cost the car rental giant its biggest quarterly loss since 2020. Hertz had been praised by the Biden administration for its ambition to convert 25% of its fleet to EVs by the end of this year. In January, however, the company announced it would instead be selling its 20,000 EVs — including Teslas — at heavily discounted prices and replacing them with gas-powered cars.<h2>Mercedes-Benz</h2>Mercedes-Benz also recently had to give up its ambition to only sell electric cars by 2030. Instead, EVs are expected to make up only 50% of the German carmaker’s sales over the next decade.<h2>Apple</h2>In February, Apple abandoned its multi-billion dollar effort to create an electric car. Despite being a decade in the works and employing 2,000 people, Project Titan was axed due to falling consumer demand.<h2>Aston Martin</h2>A lack of consumer demand is also partly to blame for Aston Martin&nbsp;<a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13138123/Aston-Martin-puts-brakes-new-electric-supercar-2026-bosses-say-drivers-want-engines-throaty-roar.html">placing</a> its battery-operated “supercar” on hold until 2026.“Demand, certainly at an Aston Martin price point, is not what we thought it was going to be two years ago,” said Aston Martin Executive Chairman Lawrence Stroll.&nbsp;<h2>Ford</h2>In December, Ford slashed production of its flagship EV at its assembly plant in Dearborn, Michigan by half. The automaker cut the monthly production quote for the all-electric F-150 Lightning pickup truck from 3,200 units to 1,600 units per month.<h2>Biden administration continues to force EV production</h2>Nevertheless, the Biden administration in March issued new climate mandates aimed at forcing more EV production. The new rules from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) contain tight emissions standards that will&nbsp;<a href="https://apnews.com/article/epa-electric-vehicles-emissions-limits-climate-biden-e6d581324af51294048df24269b5d20a">require</a> 56% of new vehicle sales to be fully electric by 2032, with an additional 13% required to be hybrids.

car market decline.jpg

US News

Biden administration continues to force EV production

Electric car company files bankruptcy as EV market folds

For the last two years, British authorities have been testing AI-powered emotion recognition cameras on travelers in train stations, according to recently disclosed documents.<h2>What can the cameras see?</h2>In each of eight train stations around the UK, five to seven cameras or sensors scan the passing crowds. Using AI software from Amazon, the cameras use object recognition algorithms to spot criminal activity, trespassing, weapons, wet floors, overcrowding, and overstuffed trash cans.&nbsp;They can also alert authorities when passengers engage in “unusual behavior,” such as shouting, running, smoking, or skateboarding.&nbsp;A combination of existing cameras and newly installed smart cameras are being used for the surveillance project. All are equipped with Amazon’s Rekognition surveillance system.<h2>Emotional recognition</h2>Through a combination of facial and behavioral analyses, the Rekognition software allows officials to also <a href="https://www.wired.com/story/amazon-ai-cameras-emotions-uk-train-passengers/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">analyze visitors’ emotions</a>. Internal documents note that the cameras can detect whether a passenger is “happy, sad [or] angry.” They can also recognize passenger satisfaction, which “could be utilized to maximum advertising and retail revenue.”<h2>Anti-social behavior</h2>Authorities can also detect passengers who exhibit “anti-social behaviour,” which&nbsp;<a href="https://www.met.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/asb/asb/antisocial-behaviour/what-is-antisocial-behaviour/">according</a> to London’s Metropolitan Police Service means “behaviour by a person which causes, or is likely to cause, harassment, alarm or distress to persons not of the same household as the person.”<h2>Social distancing, face masks, and demographics</h2>Other&nbsp;<a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24757655-usecases_dpas_review_managed_stations?responsive=1&amp;title=1">use cases</a> for the surveillance cameras include detecting whether passengers are keeping to social distancing rules and wearing face masks. The cameras can also scan for demographics by identifying people’s age profiles and “socio-economic classification,” which the documents note can create “revenue opportunities for better targeted advertising and product placement.”<h2>‘Quite a concerning step’</h2>The documents were obtained by Big Brother Watch, a civil rights and government watchdog group, in response to a Freedom of Information (FOI) request. Network Rail, a body within the Department of Transportation which manages most of the country’s train network, has been overseeing the surveillance project.&nbsp;“The rollout and normalization of AI surveillance in these public spaces, without much consultation and conversation, is quite a concerning step,” Jake Hurfurt, head of research and investigations at Big Brother Watch,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wired.com/story/amazon-ai-cameras-emotions-uk-train-passengers/">told</a> Wired.As of now, the surveillance systems do not use facial recognition technology, which analyzes faces and matches them against facial images stored in certain databases.

crowd surveillance.jpg

surveillance

Cameras can also detect 'anti-social behavior,' social distancing

UK tests emotion recognition cameras in train stations

Weaponizing antisemitism

Jews for Justice head calls out 'fraudulent antisemitism accusations that seek to exploit prejudice'

Related Articles

Tech billionaires ramp up plans for 15-minute city in California

Canada introduces ‘Netflix tax’ as officials award themselves bonuses

Victoria’s female-led government seeks to reprogram men

Belgium prepares for vaccine mandates with digital ID wallet

Latest Articles

Who's afraid of Big Bad Tech?

British taxpayers cheer vigilante group destroying climate cams

Electric car company files bankruptcy as EV market folds

UK tests emotion recognition cameras in train stations