EU Parliament Pushes Funding Cuts To Orbán-Founded Patriots Group As Witch-Hunt Continues

EU Parliament Pushes Funding Cuts To Orbán-Founded Patriots Group As Witch-Hunt Continues

Via Remix News,

The European Parliament will vote today on suspending EU funding for the right-wing Patriots for Europe faction, founded by outgoing Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán.

At stake is the alleged mismanagement of €4.3 million of EU funds by Philip Claeys, the former secretary general of the far-right Identity and Democracy (ID) group, who now holds the same post for the Patriots for Europe grouping.

One vocal critic of the lack of action by Brussels in the case, according to Euractiv, has been Nick Aiossa, director of Transparency International.

To remind readers, Soros-backed Transparency International has long attacked Hungary for various alleged violations. Last February, it notoriously ranked the CEE country at the same level as Burkina Faso and South Africa in its 2024 corruption index.

“Considering the seriousness and scale of the irregularities identified, and given that the expenditures in question were authorised and validated under the authority of Mr Claeys, the initiation of a complementary investigation by OLAF appears both necessary and proportionate,” Transparency International stated.

The funds are implicated in various accusations of misuse, including “fictitious service contracts, improper procurement procedures and donations to non-parliamentary groups with ties to far-right figureheads, such as France’s Marine Le Pen,” notes Euractiv.

Le Pen was a major target of Brussels as well, with her rising popularity seen as a threat ahead of critical presidential elections in France next year. Her party, National Rally, also joined the Patriots for Europe group. She was, however, banned from running for office in France after being convicted for misappropriating over €4 million in European Parliament funds, a charge she continues to deny and blames on a witch hunt against anti-migration, conservative voices.

Le Pen has appealed the ruling.

Transparency International’s Aiossa has called for Claeys to be stripped of his power as well. Claeys has denied any wrongdoing, telling Le Monde, “All payments made in the last five years have been duly invoiced, justified and controlled.”

This vote today is critical, as it will allow Brussels to continue going after Orbán by cutting funds for the group his Fidesz party belongs to and which still holds close to 12 percent of the seats in the 2024–2029 European Parliament. It is well known that the outgoing Hungarian leader, highly unpopular among Brussels elites for his sovereignty-focused, nationalist movement, is planning to renew and rebuild his brand inside his country, in Europe, and beyond.

Curbing any resurgence of Orbán will be a high priority for the EU leadership. On the other hand, they are also wrangling with getting funding as soon as possible to Hungary’s new leader, and their darling, Péter Magyar. However, this time, unlike when the right-wing conservatives were ousted from Poland, Brussels is playing hardball, insisting that certain hurdles be overcome before money is released.

Numerous mechanisms were used over the years to go after Orbán’s successive governments, with billions in EU funds ultimately frozen, specifically, €10 billion in post-Covid recovery funds and some €7 billion in cohesion funds.

Hungary has, in fact, already met 17 out of 27 conditions demanded by Brussels, for the former, but now, Magyar has only until August to deliver on judicial independence, anti-corruption safeguards and other reforms, notes Euractiv.

Read more here…

Tyler Durden
Fri, 05/01/2026 – 06:30

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/j7IPbgL Tyler Durden

California Can’t Define ‘Hate Speech’ But May Mandate Workplace Training Anyway


A man with headphones on holds a laptop. | Illustration: Luri Gagarin/Dreamstime/California Legislative Information

“Hate speech” is notoriously hard to define and is usually a subjective characterization of harsh words. Though the term is thrown around by people describing comments they don’t like, it generally refers to expression that might not be nice but is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as well as state speech protections. But that’s not going to stop California lawmakers from trying to hector people into refraining from voicing nasty sentiments.

Training the Hate Away

Existing California law requires employers with five or more employees to provide at least two hours of training regarding sexual harassment to all supervisors, and at least one hour of training to all other employees, repeated every two years. Assembly Bill 1803, introduced by Assemblymembers Josh Lowenthal (D–Long Beach) and Rick Chavez Zbur (D–Los Angeles) and co-authored by Assemblymember Corey Jackson (D–Moreno Valley), “would additionally require that the above-described training and education include, as a component of the training and education, anti-hate speech training.”

In a press release, Lowenthal claims that “AB 1803 is about making our workplaces safer, more respectful, and more inclusive for everyone. Hate speech has no place on the job, just as sexual harassment has no place on the job. By incorporating anti hate speech training into existing sexual harassment prevention programs, we are building on a proven framework to address harmful behavior before it escalates.”

What the world really doesn’t need, it should be noted, is more state-mandated nagging about the allegedly naughty activities we shouldn’t engage in. As PBS’s Rhana Natour reported in 2018, “there’s little evidence that sexual harassment training works.” A 2016 U.S. Equal Opportunity Employment Commission report concluded that “much of the training done over the last 30 years has not worked as a prevention tool—it’s been too focused on simply avoiding legal liability.” Research by Justine Tinkler, a sociologist at the University of Georgia, found that such training mostly reinforces traditional views of sex roles by portraying men as predators and women as victims. But training is an effective time suck.

Hate speech has the added burden of being primarily a political term used to describe expression that somebody doesn’t like. This makes it very difficult to describe in an actionable way in a country that has vigorous speech protections. California’s lawmakers have not risen to the challenge.

Defining ‘Hate Speech’ Eludes Everybody

“As drafted, AB 1803 does not define hate speech,” observes the California Assembly Committee on Labor and Employment analysis of the bill. “Committee staff is not aware of a definition of hate speech in California law. Hate speech itself is not illegal but can violate employment law if it rises to an actionable level of workplace harassment or discrimination. Nevertheless, the author may wish to consider defining hate speech in the bill so as to give guidance to employers and the CRD [Civil Rights Department] since these entities will be developing the anti-hate speech training.”

So, the bill in its current reform would require employers to consume business resources and workers’ time with mandatory admonishments to not do something called “hate speech,” whatever that might be. Which is probably not illegal to begin with.

“‘Hate speech’ includes speech protected by the First Amendment — speech the government has no business trying to snuff out with legal mandates,” point out Adam Goldstein and Greg Gonzalez of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE). “But also, it has no clear or consistent definition. Because of that vagueness, efforts to regulate ‘hate speech’ risk giving the government sweeping authority to suppress views it doesn’t like.”

That’s not a hypothetical possibility—it’s reality in countries that have adopted hate speech laws. Robert Habeck, an official in Germany’s last government, was infamous for wielding the country’s restrictive speech laws against his critics. “German Economy Minister Robert Habeck has filed complaints over 730 cases of criminal hate speech since April last year,” Politico‘s Nette Nöstlinger reported in 2024. A few of the cases involved actual threats, but many others were sparked by insults such as referring to Habeck as a “professional idiot.”

Current Chancellor Freidrich Merz continues that tradition; his government pressed charges against a man who called the politician “Pinocchio.” With around 300 such prosecutions underway, a German court recently ordered the government to disclose which prosecutors are handling the cases.

In the majority of these prosecutions, people face fines and prison time for saying unpleasant things that enjoy full legal protection under American law.

Hate Speech Is Legal in the United States

“In the United States, hate speech is protected by the First Amendment,” according to the American Library Association. “Courts extend this protection on the grounds that the First Amendment requires the government to strictly protect robust debate on matters of public concern even when such debate devolves into distasteful, offensive, or hateful speech that causes others to feel grief, anger, or fear.”

“Hate speech can only be criminalized when it directly incites imminent criminal activity or consists of specific threats of violence targeted against a person or group,” the group adds.

California lawmakers have tried to clarify their proposed legislation—mostly by adding scare words. That doesn’t make supposedly hateful speech itself illegal because it can’t.

“Recent amendments to AB 1803, citing speech that ‘vilifies, humiliates, or incites hatred’ based on protected characteristics, do little to resolve this problem,” comment FIRE’s Goldstein and Gonzalez. “Terms like ‘vilify,’ ‘humiliate,’ and ‘incite hatred’ lack clear legal meaning, so you end up with a vague mandate that fails to distinguish between protected speech and unprotected conduct.”

They warn that if forced to implement hate speech training, private employers will probably restrict perfectly lawful speech just to avoid hassles with state regulators.

A.B. 1803 was introduced as part of a package with A.B. 1578, which mandates hate speech training for state and local elected officials, and A.B. 2347, which mandates hate crime training for police officers.

It will be interesting to see if California lawmakers succeed more at consuming workplace time or at inviting First Amendment lawsuits.

The post California Can't Define 'Hate Speech' But May Mandate Workplace Training Anyway appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/wbHj2vf
via IFTTT

Review: Latest Bridgerton Season Explores Personal Autonomy


minisbridgerton | Photo: <em>Bridgerton</em>/Netflix

Netflix’s Bridgerton is a Regency-era drama known for its lavish balls and magnificently over-the-top dresses. In the show’s fourth season, released on Netflix in January and February, the show circles timely themes of journalistic freedom and personal autonomy amid all the pomp and pretension.

Set in an alternate-history version of early 19th century London, Bridgerton follows young men and women navigating the “marriage mart” under the watchful eyes of several judgmental aristocratic families, Queen Charlotte, and an ever-present gossip column written by the mysterious Lady Whistledown.

The identity of the author of those pseudonymous missives was outed in Season 3 as Penelope Featherington. Operating outside of polite society’s rules, Penelope becomes the show’s quiet radical. Her anonymous gossip pamphlet is an enormous success, so much so that she earns an income. Of course, the state attempts to control it.

In the newest season, Penelope is summoned to the queen’s palace, where she is told who and what she must write about. Coverage of the “maid wars,” a shortage of domestic help that causes havoc and forces households to raise wages, is not interesting enough for the queen. The queen demands gossip!

When the gossip writer seeks permission to give up her column entirely, Queen Charlotte refuses. Penelope is forced to choose between having her thoughts and words censored by the queen or risking everything—social standing, financial security, and more—to defy the bullying head of state.

For all its romantic escapism, Bridgerton quietly reminds viewers that the fight for freedom to write freely and earn a living has always been a radical act—especially for women.

The post Review: Latest <i>Bridgerton</i> Season Explores Personal Autonomy appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/CIcFX1a
via IFTTT

British Police Raid Islamic Group Accused Of Sex Trafficking And Slavery

British Police Raid Islamic Group Accused Of Sex Trafficking And Slavery

At least nine members of a Cheshire Islamic group have been arrested in a raid of 500 British police officers as part of an investigation into sexual offenses, slavery and forced marriage. 

Officers received reports of human trafficking, rape, and other crimes involving members of a group known as the Ahmadi Religion of Peace and Light, based in Crewe.  Seven men and three women were taken into custody, according to a statement from the Cheshire Police, who said the investigation was initiated because of allegations made by a woman who was previously part of the group in 2023.

Chief Superintendent Gareth Wrigley, of Cheshire Constabulary, said: 

“Today’s operation is the outcome of a detailed and robust investigation into reports of serious sexual offenses, forced marriage and modern slavery involving members of a religious group called Ahmadi Religion of Peace and Light in Crewe. 

While those arrested are members of the group, I want to make clear that this is not an investigation into the religion, this is an investigation into the serious allegations which have been reported to us…”

The AROPL’s is a religious movement founded in 2015 by Abdullah Hashem Aba Al-Sadiq (Egyptian-American raised Sunni Muslim). It draws heavily from Shia Islamic traditions.  The group self-identifies with Islamic roots, uses Islamic terminology (referring to their leader as the Qaim/Mahdi appointed in relation to Prophet Muhammad), and maintains many Islamic practices.

British authorities in the UK have been quick to disconnect the sect from the wider Islamic migrant community.  The reasons for this are obvious – The British government is under considerable pressure to stop hiding migrant crime and Islamic crime, but their political agendas are deeply intertwined with third-world immigration.  Islamic groups consistently deny that the actions of grooming gangs have any connection to Muslim culture.     

Islamic fundamentalism justifies the abuse and exploitation of “non-believers”, using the “Doctrine of Abrogation” and a series of passages from the Quran specifically allowing for the humiliation or enslavement of foreigners and non-believers as a means to force them into religious submission.  The Islamic slave trade operated throughout Africa and the Middle East until it was disrupted by the British Empire from 1833 to 1937.    

The surprising level of transparency of the latest raid may be part of a British government effort to clean up their image after it was revealed in 2025 that pro-multicultural authorities had spent the past decade covering up numerous reports of Islamic “grooming gangs” kidnapping and assaulting young British girls.  The government had been aware of this criminal activity as early as 2015 and did nothing.  

It should be noted that many British activists have been threatened by law enforcement, attacked by the establishment media and even jailed over the years simply for exposing this ongoing problem common among third world migrants.  The grooming gangs were ignored because their activities were inconvenient to the liberal open borders narrative dominating social politics in Europe since 2014.

Today, however, polling shows that both the left wing Labour Party and the Conservatives Party (which is also left wing) are facing political obliteration in the next general election (held in 2029) due to their mishandling of the immigration problem as well as the UK economy.  Unless they offer substantial changes to their policies, they stand to be swept out of Parliament.

The multiculturalists may very well be removed from government regardless.      

Tyler Durden
Fri, 05/01/2026 – 05:45

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/f8CFdO4 Tyler Durden

Canada’s Culture Minister: Regulating Online Content A Duty Of Federal Government

Canada’s Culture Minister: Regulating Online Content A Duty Of Federal Government

Authored by Olivia Gomm via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Culture Minister Marc Miller says the federal government has the role of regulating content on the internet and that Canada is years behind other countries when it comes to regulating “online harms.”

Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture Marc Miller rises during Question Period in the House of Commons on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, on Feb. 25, 2026. The Canadian Press/Spencer Colby

Miller told reporters on Parliament Hill April 29 that when it comes to the regulation of online content and social media, that role is “assumed by the federal government, whether we’re talking about moratoriums or the proper regulation of egregious online harms.”

That’s stuff that we’re, frankly, a couple years behind in regulating, as we see other jurisdictions like Australia, like Britain, like France taking action,” Miller said, as was first covered by Blacklock’s Reporter. “We need to take action as well.”

Asked to comment on when the government plans on tabling a new online harms bill, Miller said “we’re working on it” and declined to share a timeline.

Miller told reporters earlier this month that a new online harms legislation is in the works and the government is “seriously” thinking about adding a social media ban for children to the bill, but did not provide a status or timeline for the introduction of the legislation then either.

The upcoming legislation will be the government’s third attempt to legislate on “online harms,” following previous proposals in 2021 and 2024, neither of which passed before Parliament was dissolved. Conservatives and civil liberties advocates had criticized both bills as posing a risk to freedom of expression.

In March, the federal government reconvened the same group of experts first formed in 2022 that made recommendations to the government on how to address online content deemed to be harmful, which led to Bill C-63.

The department of industry said in a recent report to the Senate social affairs committee that Ottawa is examining a “future online safety regime” meant to reduce content deemed as being harmful, such as hateful content and cyberbullying on large platforms.

To advise on this proposal, the government has recently reconvened the Expert Advisory Group on Online Safety whose members previously contributed to the development of online harms legislation, to engage on new and emerging issues related to online harms,” the department said.

“Any future legislative proposal would be subject to parliamentary scrutiny, and details will be made public at the appropriate time.”

In 2021, Bill C-36 proposed a regulatory framework for harmful online content, but faced criticism from the opposition over its scope, including concerns about definitions of harmful speech and the extent of proposed oversight powers.

In 2024, Bill C-63 placed a stronger focus on protecting children and addressing specific categories of harmful content, and proposed the creation of new regulatory bodies such as a digital safety commissioner and ombudsperson. It also included amendments to the Criminal Code and human rights law, with stricter penalties for certain hate-related offences.

After pushback on the 2024 bill, the government said it was open to splitting the bill in two to facilitate the passage of measures protecting children, but the bill lapsed after Parliament was prorogued in January of last year.

Justice Minister Sean Fraser said last November that new legislation regulating online content would be different from the government’s previous proposals. Meanwhile, former Heritage Minister Steven Guilbeault said a few months earlier that upcoming online harms legislation would be similar to the versions tabled in 2024 and 2021.

The Liberals’ election platform last spring promised to “introduce legislation to protect children from horrific crimes including online sexploitation and extortion and give law enforcement and prosecutors the tools to stop these crimes and bring perpetrators to justice.”

The Liberals also pledged to “make it a criminal offence to distribute non-consensual sexual deepfakes” and to “increase penalties for the distribution of intimate images without consent.”

Jennifer Cowan, Noé Charter, and Paul Rowan Brian contributed to this report.

Tyler Durden
Fri, 05/01/2026 – 05:00

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/gEuwvPs Tyler Durden

Review: Minecraft Is Still Getting Better Over 15 Years After Its Original Release


Minecraft screenshot | Photo: Minecraft/Microsoft

With its iconic blocky visual style, intuitive crafting system, rewarding resource acquisition, and many multiplayer game modes to explore, Minecraft revolutionized the sandbox survival genre. Fifteen years later, it’s still going strong.

The game was created by the Swedish programmer Markus “Notch” Persson over a single weekend in May 2009. A month later, Notch founded the Stockholm-based Mojang Studios to develop Minecraft 1.0.0, the official version released for Mac and PC in November 2011. Microsoft announced its acquisition of Minecraft and Mojang Studios in September 2014, after the game had sold 54 million copies and boasted 100 million registered users.

Contrary to the concerns of big-is-bad types, Minecraft‘s charm has only grown since its Big Tech acquisition. Minecraft 26.1—the newest version of the game, released in March—features myriad new blocks, mechanics, mobs, and challenges that preacquisition Minecraft lacked.

The post Review: <i>Minecraft</i> Is Still Getting Better Over 15 Years After Its Original Release appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/J7Re9Nu
via IFTTT

Brickbat: Who’s Gonna Drive You Home?


A yellow school bus at a stop sign | Sonya Etchison/Dreamstime

In Minnesota, Anthony Stephen Israelson was found guilty of two misdemeanors for driving a school bus drunk. The case stemmed from a 2024 incident when he drove a school bus containing more than a dozen children, between kindergarten and 10th grade, with a blood alcohol level of 0.161, more than four times the legal limit for commercial drivers. Israelson was sentenced to 364 days in jail on each count, with all but one day suspended. He must also complete two years of supervised probation and will be subject to random drug and alcohol tests.

The post Brickbat: Who's Gonna Drive You Home? appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/HSwONqX
via IFTTT

Brickbat: Who’s Gonna Drive You Home?


A yellow school bus at a stop sign | Sonya Etchison/Dreamstime

In Minnesota, Anthony Stephen Israelson was found guilty of two misdemeanors for driving a school bus drunk. The case stemmed from a 2024 incident when he drove a school bus containing more than a dozen children, between kindergarten and 10th grade, with a blood alcohol level of 0.161, more than four times the legal limit for commercial drivers. Israelson was sentenced to 364 days in jail on each count, with all but one day suspended. He must also complete two years of supervised probation and will be subject to random drug and alcohol tests.

The post Brickbat: Who's Gonna Drive You Home? appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/HSwONqX
via IFTTT

China Reopens Fuel Export Spigot, Offering Relief To Asian Buyers

China Reopens Fuel Export Spigot, Offering Relief To Asian Buyers

Beijing is reversing its curbs on refined fuel exports after halting shipments in the opening days of the U.S.-Iran conflict. This move suggests that Chinese domestic inventories are now at comfortable levels, allowing state refiners to reopen the export spigot, even as much of Asia remains gripped by a fuel shock caused by disrupted Gulf energy flows through the Hormuz chokepoint.

There was chatter earlier this week that China’s state-owned refiners were applying for government permits to resume fuel exports in May. These include China Petrochemical (Sinopec Group) and China National Petroleum Corporation.

By late in the week, Bloomberg reported that state-owned refiners had received government approval to export 500,000 tons of fuel next month.

People familiar with the upcoming shipments said the one-off quota would allow gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel to be sent to neighboring Asian countries, providing relief amid a worsening fuel crunch.

They said these shipments will be loaded onto tankers and are likely destined for Vietnam, Laos, and other nearby nations.

China’s U-turn on export curbs comes weeks after the International Monetary Fund, World Bank, and International Energy Agency urged countries to avoid panic hoarding of energy supplies, as JPMorgan analysts warned that Asia would face the most immediate impact from the Gulf energy shock.

 

Tyler Durden
Fri, 05/01/2026 – 03:30

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/QTYoR6v Tyler Durden