Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
Leslie Kajomovitz Profile picture
@kikas6652
Aug 10, 2025 • 10 tweets • 5 min read • Read on X
Scrolly
🧵On Friday, EU hailed its Media Freedom Act as a "win for press freedom & democracy." But hidden in the fine print: gov’t can spy on, censor, & arrest journalists if “public interest” calls for it—an undefined, shifting term. This law builds a media legal cage, not a free press. Image
On Friday, the new European Media Freedom Act went into effect. Ursula von der Leyen hailed it as a shield for journalists & a key pillar of democracy—a bright European answer to rising authoritarianism. But the law’s true impact goes far beyond these promises. Image
Read the fine print: The EMFA says journalists won’t be forced to reveal sources, spied on, or arrested—unless “Union or national law” allows it, justified by an “overriding public interest.” Translation: you’re free to report until the government decides otherwise. Image
The EMFA permits “intrusive surveillance software” on journalists for crimes with 3+ years prison sentences. This includes terrorism, human trafficking—and vague terms like “racism and xenophobia” that can be stretched to criminalize political speech. Image
The EMFA requires registries of media owners. It sets up an EU-wide board to combat “polarizing content” & “disinformation.” In other words, those defining who is “trusted media” will have the power to regulate, surveil, & , when it sees fit, silence those it deems untrustworthy. Image
This isn’t a gentle drift but a legal framework for controlled speech—celebrated as democratic progress. The EU rewards obedient media and punishes dissenters like Hungary, while praising compliant state broadcasters. Image
As the EU tightens control over digital speech with laws like the Media Freedom Act, the UN is expanding its role globally. At the 20th Internet Governance Forum, the UN pushed frameworks to set international rules for online content—framed as fighting “disinformation” Image
Beyond policy, UN peacekeepers deploy digital teams to "monitor & counter" “harmful narratives” in conflict zones. UN programs also train journalists and influencers to promote sanctioned narratives, positioning the UN as the digital age’s truth arbiter. Image
Image
The EU & UN are building a top-down info regime that monopolizes “truth,” punishing dissent—authoritarianism masked. The EU’s Media Freedom Act empowers censorship and narrative control. This isn’t a drift; it’s a sprint toward totalitarianism

Full Post: globaldisconnect.substack.com/p/the-eu-isnt-…Image
Don't forget Follow, Share & Like this post

Subscribe to my substack for more: 🔗 globaldisconnect.substack.com/?r=1g37ub&utm_…Image

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Leslie Kajomovitz

Leslie Kajomovitz Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @kikas6652

Leslie Kajomovitz Profile picture
Jan 31
🧵Every few years, Europe "rediscovers" the same idea: two-speed Europe, multi-speed Europe, variable geometry. The terminology changes, but the premise remains the same — some EU states should integrate deeper and faster, while others are pushed to "second class" States. Image
Two-speed Europe” is the idea that the EU should formally accept unequal integration. A core group would advance deeper integration, while others are left out—bound by Brussels’ rules but excluded from decision-making. Sold as flexibility, turns an informal imbalance into a permanent hierarchyImage
What’s new isn’t the idea, but the confidence behind it. Germany has revived it openly, France backs it, others quietly agree. Sold as realism, it dodges the truth: the problem isn’t tiers, it’s the EU itself. Multi-speed Europe isn’t reform—it’s an admission of failure. Image
Read 7 tweets
Leslie Kajomovitz Profile picture
Jan 21
🧵Almost no one is asking the most important question about Trump’s “Board of Peace”: Is it even constitutional? Here’s why Trump’s “Board of Peace” raises serious constitutional issues that no one is talking about. Image
“Minilateralism,” Non-Binding Commitments, and Why Labels Do Not End the Treaty Inquiry

Some describe the Board as a form of executive “minilateralism,” akin to informal contact groups created without Senate ratification.

The problem, U.S. constitutional law turns on substance, not labels. The Charter does not describe a temporary forum; it creates an enduring institution with legal personality—meaning the capacity to act as an independent legal entity under international law.

Legal personality is decisive because it transforms a diplomatic gathering into a standing organization capable of: Owning property, Entering contracts, Suing and being sued, Acting independently of its member states

Under U.S. law, such status cannot be self-declared. It requires either congressional authorization or designation under the International Organizations Immunities Act (IOIA). The Board satisfies neither. As a result, its claimed legal personality has no domestic legal grounding, even as the United States becomes politically and institutionally bound by creating, staffing, and chairing it.

“Non-binding” does not mean constitutionally irrelevant. As Medellín v. Texas makes clear, obligations may be non-self-executing in U.S. courts yet still bind the United States politically and diplomatically.

Expiration clauses do not cure this problem when renewal authority rests solely with the Chairman, enabling conditional perpetuity outside democratic oversight.Image
Immunities, Domestic Law, and the Limits of Executive Authority

The Charter goes further by asserting that the Board itself shall “ensure” privileges and immunities through agreements negotiated by its own officials. While defenders argue this merely contemplates host-state agreements subject to domestic law, the post explains that this misunderstands how immunity works in the United States.

Under U.S. law, immunity is derivative, not inherent. It can arise only through: Congressional authorization (via statute or treaty), or Presidential designation under the IOIA, which itself presupposes lawful U.S. participation

An organization created unilaterally by the President cannot bootstrap itself into immunity. Executive agreements cannot displace Congress’s control over jurisdiction, courts, liability, or regulatory enforcement. Even if no immunity is ultimately granted, the constitutional problem arises from constructing a framework that treats immunity as an expected institutional attribute, negotiated by executive authority and potentially administered by a self-perpetuating Chairman.

Invocations of UN practice or Security Council resolutions do not resolve this. UN immunities in the U.S. exist because Congress enacted implementing statutes. International endorsement cannot override domestic separation of powers.Image
Read 14 tweets
Leslie Kajomovitz Profile picture
Nov 26, 2025
🧵Thanksgiving wasn’t born in a peaceful colonial feast—it was created by Lincoln in 1863 as a wartime ritual to hold a fractured nation together. Today’s polarized America faces its own internal divide and foreign adversaries eager to exploit it. The holiday’s lesson is clear: unity is national security and the only way to save a divided nation.Image
The myth most people imagine Thanksgiving as a colonial harvest ritual. But the holiday we celebrate today—this national pause for unity—was invented during the Civil War. Yes, Plymouth had a 1621 meal, but it wasn’t called Thanksgiving, wasn’t a tradition and it wasn't repeated.Image
The first real national Thanksgiving was proclaimed on November 26, 1863, in the middle of the Civil War. Lincoln issued it four months after Gettysburg, as the Union was still burying its dead. Thanksgiving wasn’t born from abundance. It was born from national desperation. Image
Read 11 tweets
Leslie Kajomovitz Profile picture
Nov 20, 2025
🧵Israel is passing a new law to “cut water & electricity” to UNRWA. This amendment enforces the 2024 law banning UNRWA from operating in East Jerusalem, clarifying that utilities to its offices—which the agency refuses to close—count as prohibited contact. Image
If you read the headlines about the Knesset voting to cut water and electricity to UNRWA, you would think Israel suddenly woke up one morning and passed new “draconian” legislation targeting the UN agency. In reality, that narrative is not just misleading—it is factually wrong. Image
This isn’t about cutting water or electricity to homes or refugee camps—those aren’t supplied by Israeli companies. The amendment targets UNRWA’s East Jerusalem offices, which the agency refused to vacate. It simply enforces the law. Image
Read 6 tweets
Leslie Kajomovitz Profile picture
Nov 18, 2025
🧵Trump selling the F-3, the world’s most advanced stealth fighter to a regime that doesn’t even recognizes Israel’s existence is not only reckless, it’s potentially illegal. U.S. law requires any defense sale to the Middle East preserves Israel’s Qualitative Military Edge. (QME) Image
Since 2008, U.S. law has required presidents to ensure Israel keeps a clear military edge. Under the Arms Export Control Act, any Middle East arms sale must be certified as not harming Israel’s QME—a mandate reaffirmed in later defense laws. It isn’t custom. It’s statutory. Image
Even downgraded export F-35s alters the balance. QME law requires that no sale diminish Israel’s edge—and stealth can’t be partially exported. Once Saudi Arabia has the F-35, the gap collapses. Israel’s superiority is gone—precisely what the law forbids.
Read 7 tweets
Leslie Kajomovitz Profile picture
Nov 18, 2025
🧵Many believe only Security Council resolutions “under Chapter VII” are binding. That’s a myth. The UN Charter makes clear that legal force comes from the Council’s authority and the resolutions' operative language—not from magic words. Image
Article 25 of the Charter, obligates UN members to carry out Security Council decisions. Chapter VII adds enforcement tools like sanctions or force, but doesn’t limit the resolution's binding authority. Image
Operative verbs determine whether a UN Security Council resolution is binding: “Decides” & “Demands” bind states; “Calls upon,” “Urges,” “Recommends,” & “Welcomes” do not. Binding force comes from wording, not Chapter VII. Image
Read 25 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

Send Email!

:(