RE: https://climatejustice.social/@mago/116245185578560986

You don't need to understand German to understand this deception.

In the unmodified LIVE clip (that is shown at the end for comparison), you can see Javier Bardem saying "No to war and free Palestine".

When German state TV "Tagesschau" reported about it, they cut out the "… and free Palestine" part.

What Germans who watch their BBC-equivalent are seeing is Javier Bardem saying "No to war" and then Tagesschau cutting away with the comment that Javier Bardem was one of the few who offered a political statement. Referring to the "No to war" part.

With German TV being like this, and most Germans getting their news from Tagesschau (German for "the day reviewed"), one doesn't need to wonder why most genocide deniers on Mastodon are German.

Outraging that I as a German have to pay ~18 EUR each month to finance this state propaganda.

#germany #israel #propaganda #zionism

RE: https://mastox.eu/@UNRWA/116231673393186341

Don't forget
#westbank #palestine #SettlerColonialism

RE: https://digitalcourage.social/@echo_pbreyer/116210928508477743

A major victory -- although the fight still isn't over. From the article:

"In a sensational turn of events in the fight against Chat Control, a majority in the European Parliament voted today to end the untargeted mass scanning of private communications. In doing so, the Parliament firmly rejected the error-prone and unconstitutional surveillance practices of recent years. Pressure is now mounting on EU governments to respect the MEPs’ vote and bury untargeted mass surveillance in Europe once and for all....

Based on today’s mandate, trilogue negotiations between the EU Parliament, the European Commission, and the Council of the EU are set to begin as early as tomorrow. Negotiations are taking place under extreme time pressure, as the current interim regulation authorizing Chat Control expires on April 6. The EU Commission and the vast majority of the EU Council—except for Italy—have so far categorically rejected any restrictions on untargeted mass scanning."

It's also worth highlighting that this is also a victory for the EU against US tech imperialism:

"The push for Chat Control is heavily driven by foreign-funded lobby groups and tech vendors. The US-based organization Thorn, which literally sells the exact scanning software in question, spends hundreds of thousands of euros lobbying in Brussels. The tech industry has officially lobbied side-by-side with NGOs for a law that ensures their profits and data access, rather than protecting children."

#chatControl

It feels like Proton are being intentionally misleading in their statements. They know that most of their customers aren't familiar with how legal process actually works, so are happy to spread half-truths.

Under US law, a US law enforcement agency (LEA) typically has to apply for a subpoena or search warrant with a US court. The court is then responsible for deciding if the legal bar for search a request has been met, then either grants or denies it.

The problem is, if a company has no real US footprint (no US corporate entity, offices, servers, etc.), then a US court typically doesn't have the jurisdiction to compel the company to hand over customer data (except in some rare circumstances). Even if the court approved the warrant anyway, it wouldn't really be legally binding.

Which is why the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) exists. MLAT enables law enforcement agencies in one company to send requests for information to law enforcement agencies in another. Switzerland has such a treaty with the US. This means that the FBI can request that Swiss authorities hand over a Swiss company's data on their behalf.

Any country requesting information held by a company in a foreign jurisdiction would typically do so via MLAT. Which means from Proton's perspective, the legal request would appear to originate from their local law enforcement, not the FBI. Which they clearly understand based on their Reddit post.

Saying "we don't respond to legal requests from anywhere other than Swiss authorities" seems very intentionally worded to give the impression that the company does not cooperate with foreign law enforcement. But since it'd be the Swiss authorities handling any such requests, they'd have to comply, since as they admitted, they have to comply with local laws.

There is, however, some useful (but more nuanced) information here:

Firstly, MLAT requests are handled by local law enforcement according to local law. So if there is a difference between the law of the sending and recipient country, that might mean the MLAT request is denied. That probably doesn't mean much, because if you're on the FBI's radar, the chances are you did something that is also massively illegal in Switzerland too.

Secondly, they are 100% correct in saying that no other service provider is going to do any better. They're all beholden to local laws, and the ones that think they're not tend to get their doors blown off by SWAT like CyberBunker did. The only exception is if the company resides in a country which does not cooperate with US law enforcement (which Proton does not).

But the part that's extremely disingenuous is that the "we only respond to requests from the Swiss authorities". That statement is likely intended to imply they don't cooperate with law enforcement in any other countries, which is simply not true. Switzerland has MLAT agreements with over 30 counties.

People really need to understand that no company is going to shield you from the FBI (or any reputable law enforcement agency). They'll use misleading statements to make it sounds like they don't cooperate with law enforcement, but they do. They have to.