Two years ago, every argument about AI was about quality. The machines hallucinated court cases, absorbed biases from their training data, misspelled words in their own images, drew hands with six fingers, and couldn’t count the letters in strawberry. The confident claims that biases and hallucination errors were inherent to machines already sound quaint. Those […]
The post From slop to non-slop: The new big AI theme is quantity appeared first on Asia Times.
Bolivia prison project “La Tumba” would isolate high-risk inmates in Santa Cruz, inspired by El Salvador’s controversial CECOT model.
Related: Seven People Killed by Flooding in Santa Cruz, Southern Bolivia
The Bolivia prison project announced by Santa Cruz Governor Juan Pablo Velasco would create a maximum-security facility in the Chaco region, inspired by El Salvador’s controversial Terrorism Confinement Center, known as CECOT.
Velasco said his administration is seeking international financing to build the prison, which would be named “La Tumba”—The Tomb.
The facility would be located in an isolated area of the Chaco cruceño, far from major urban centers, to ensure a strict confinement regime.
According to the governor, the prison would operate with permanent surveillance and severely restricted communication with the outside world. Inmates would be allowed to contact relatives only through authorized video calls.
Velasco presented the proposal as a response to organized crime networks that operate from inside Bolivia’s prisons.
“Prisons turned into offices for organized crime are over,” the governor said. “Dangerous criminals must be isolated from society, not running their businesses from a cell.”
He added that the project would respect rights but end what he described as criminal privileges inside detention centers.
The proposal takes direct inspiration from the CECOT prison built in El Salvador under President Nayib Bukele. That facility was created as part of Bukele’s hard-line security strategy against gangs and organized crime.
CECOT has become a symbol of Bukele’s security policy, but human rights organizations have raised serious concerns about due process, prison conditions and allegations of abuse.
The Santa Cruz governor did not provide details about the cost of the project, the source of financing, the construction timeline or the number of inmates the facility would hold.
The announcement comes amid growing pressure to address crime and violence in Bolivia’s prison system.
Santa Cruz is Bolivia’s most populous department and includes Palmasola, the country’s largest and most conflictive prison.
Bolivia’s Defensoría del Pueblo | United Nations Human Rights Office
The Bolivia prison project is intended to separate inmates considered high-risk from the general prison population.
Velasco argues that the current system allows criminal organizations to continue operating from prison cells. He says the new facility would prevent leaders of criminal networks from directing illegal activities while in detention.
The governor’s proposal is part of a broader security agenda that includes efforts to strengthen police patrols and increase the number of officers on the streets.
The Santa Cruz governorate has also promoted a legislative route to return command authority over the police to the departmental government.
Currently, Bolivia has only one maximum-security prison: Chonchocoro, located in the highland department of La Paz.
Santa Cruz has four main detention centers administered by the General Directorate of the Penitentiary System.
The most important is Palmasola, an urban prison located within the city of Santa Cruz. It houses both men and women and is considered the country’s largest, most populated and most violent detention facility.
Palmasola has been the scene of serious episodes of violence between inmates in previous years.
The proposed prison in the Chaco would seek to decentralize the custody of high-risk detainees and reduce the risks created by locating large prisons near residential areas.
The project would also aim to prevent criminal groups from maintaining control over prison populations.
However, the proposal raises questions about the legal framework, the definition of “high-risk” inmates and the safeguards that would protect due process.
Human rights organizations have warned that maximum-security facilities can become sites of isolation, abuse and lack of transparency if they are not subject to independent monitoring.
The Defensoría del Pueblo has repeatedly warned that Bolivia’s prison system is facing a structural crisis.
The institution reported that the country’s prison population reached 33,058 people in 2025, nearly double the 17,305 inmates recorded in 2020.
The increase has intensified overcrowding, weakened security and reduced access to health services.
Bolivia’s prisons are currently operating at approximately 109 percent of their installed capacity, according to the Defensoría del Pueblo.
More than half of the prison population is being held under pretrial detention, meaning they have not received a final conviction.
The institution has warned that overcrowding, poor nutrition, limited medical care and inadequate security are creating a humanitarian crisis inside the country’s 46 detention centers.
The Defensoría has called for measures to reduce overcrowding, including judicial congestion programs, alternative sentences and legal reforms.
It has also urged the state to guarantee food, medical care and dignified conditions for all people deprived of liberty.
Amnesty International—El Salvador | Human Rights Watch—El Salvador
The Bolivia prison project is inspired by a model that has generated significant controversy in El Salvador and across Latin America.
El Salvador’s CECOT was inaugurated in 2023 as part of President Nayib Bukele’s campaign against gangs. The facility was designed to hold up to 40,000 inmates.
The prison became the centerpiece of a state of exception declared in March 2022. That measure suspended several constitutional protections and expanded police powers to arrest and detain suspected gang members.
El Salvador’s government says the policy has drastically reduced gang violence and restored public security.
The administration argues that the state of exception was necessary to dismantle criminal organizations that had controlled neighborhoods, extorted businesses and committed violent crimes for decades.
Bukele remains highly popular among many Salvadorans who credit his government with improving safety and reducing gang activity.
However, human rights organizations have documented serious concerns about the policy.
Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have reported mass arbitrary detentions, lack of due process, mistreatment of detainees and restricted access to legal defense.
Rights groups have also raised concerns about prison conditions at CECOT, including overcrowding, prolonged isolation and limited contact with families and lawyers.
Reports by human rights organizations have alleged that detainees have faced beatings, sexual violence, denial of medical care and incommunicado detention.
The Salvadoran government has rejected those accusations and says its policies respect human rights while protecting citizens from criminal violence.
The debate over the Bukele model has become increasingly influential across Latin America. Several governments have expressed interest in adopting tougher security policies, including mass detention, military deployment and the construction of large prisons.
Supporters argue that the model responds to public demands for security in countries affected by organized crime, extortion and drug trafficking.
Critics warn that it can weaken democratic institutions, criminalize poverty and allow abuses to occur without accountability.
The Bolivia prison project will therefore be closely watched by human rights organizations, legal experts and regional governments.
The proposal could mark a significant shift in Bolivia’s approach to crime and incarceration.
Impulsamos una ruta legislativa para devolver al gobernador facultades de mando sobre la Policía, fortalecer los patrullajes y garantizar más efectivos en nuestras calles. pic.twitter.com/UXKDT0ip18
— Gobernación de Santa Cruz (@GobSantaCruz) October 21, 2026
The Bolivia prison project reflects a broader regional debate over security, democracy and the limits of state power.
Latin American governments have faced growing pressure to respond to organized crime, drug trafficking, extortion and prison violence.
In several countries, public demand for security has strengthened political leaders who promise hard-line measures, including mass arrests, military deployment and the construction of maximum-security prisons.
El Salvador has become the most visible example of that approach. Bukele’s government has used the state of exception to detain tens of thousands of people and build large-scale detention facilities.
The model has gained influence across the region, but it has also raised concerns about the erosion of constitutional protections and judicial independence.
Bolivia’s proposal could place the country within that wider trend. Santa Cruz is a key economic and political region, and its governor has made security a central issue of his administration.
The project could also affect relations between the departmental government and Bolivia’s central authorities.
Prison administration, criminal justice and policing are areas that require coordination between national and subnational governments. Any new prison would need to comply with national law, budget rules and human rights obligations.
The proposal comes at a time when Bolivia’s prison system is already under severe strain. The Defensoría del Pueblo has warned that overcrowding and pretrial detention are weakening the rule of law.
A new maximum-security prison could reduce pressure on existing facilities, but it would not solve the underlying causes of prison overcrowding.
Experts say that reducing pretrial detention, improving judicial efficiency and addressing poverty and inequality are essential to creating a sustainable solution.
The Bolivia prison project will therefore test whether the country can strengthen security while preserving human rights and democratic institutions.
© Aleksey Kondratyev for The New York Times
Michigan Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed is set to rally with former President Barack Obama on Saturday as Republicans raise questions about his support among Black voters, a crucial Democratic constituency in the battleground state.
Obama formally endorsed the Michigan Democrat earlier this month, filming a campaign ad that ran on Oct. 12 imploring his supporters "to support Abdul El-Sayed for the United States Senate." His upcoming rally with El-Sayed has become a major political event as the progressive Senate candidate continues his effort to build bridges with the Democratic Party’s establishment.
Obama's support has also renewed scrutiny of El-Sayed's past criticism of the former president, including a sharply worded 2012 essay accusing him of failing to deliver on the promises of his presidency. Conservatives have suggested that the El-Sayed campaign is leaning on Obama to build support among the African American community, whose turnout could be decisive on Election Day.
Claims that El-Sayed is only receiving lukewarm support from the Black community began during his primary race against Democratic Rep. Haley Stevens. El-Sayed performed strongly among Arab American voters during the Democratic primary, but he narrowly defeated Stevens after polls showed her attracting stronger support among Black Democratic voters. El-Sayed's uneven support among key Democratic constituencies has raised questions about his ability to unite the party's coalition heading into November.
Black voters are crucial to the Democratic coalition in Michigan. Low turnout or defections to the GOP in Michigan among African Americans could seriously endanger the Democratic Party’s path to control of the Senate.
OBAMA'S STAR POWER GETS A REALITY CHECK FROM BLACK VOTERS IN CRUCIAL SENATE RACE: 'IT'S A TURNOFF'
A poll conducted by Fox News Digital in late September found that just 77% of Black voters were supportive of El-Sayed, a figure well below where Democrats typically perform with the demographic.
It is unclear what impact, if any, Obama wading into Michigan’s Senate election will have.
Fox News Digital spoke with more than a dozen Black voters in Detroit about Obama's endorsement, finding mixed reactions that included skepticism among undecided voters and enthusiasm from others who already planned to support El-Sayed. While the undecided voters largely agreed that Obama was still a leader within the Democratic Party, they generally did not put much weight on the former president’s endorsement of El-Sayed.
"Honestly, it's a turn-off just because I've seen too many candidates use him just to manipulate the Democratic vote," Mercedes, one undecided Black voter, told Fox News Digital about Obama's endorsement.
"What he's been able to do is from an image standpoint, as far as ‘hope,’ he drove the point there," another undecided African American voter told Fox News Digital. "But as far as really giving back to the community, minority owned businesses, and everyone across the board, I don't really think he really got there for me … he really hasn't swayed me one way or another."
Rita, an undecided Black voter who said she had recently been homeless, said that Obama’s endorsement would not move the needle for her as she prefers to do her own research on candidates.
Juanita, another Black voter who wasn’t sure how she would vote in November, told Fox News Digital that, "I don't want to be pushed to vote for him because somebody else is backing him."
Even some African Americans who voted early for El-Sayed said Obama’s backing didn’t mean much of anything to them.
"I think that a lot of people put more stock into who the person is than what he does … his yay or nay doesn't sway me either way," one such voter told Fox News Digital.
Undecided voters, however, had mixed feelings about El-Sayed’s changing position on Obama.
"Yeah, I don't understand how you can endorse somebody that was kind of the opposition when you were in office," Juanita told Fox News Digital. "I mean, that doesn't make sense."
"I think I see it as a flip flop, but I also see it as an opportunity to pretty much highlight those things and how he's actually changed and why their objectives may align now," another voter said. "You know, people's objectives change, their perspectives change."
Others, however, pointed out that pivots like El-Sayed’s are nothing new in politics, pointing to the fact that Vice President JD Vance was once a staunch critic of President Donald Trump.
The controversy surrounding El-Sayed’s purported flip-flop on Obama can be traced back to a 2012 Huffington Post essay where he accused Obama of failing to live up to the progressive rhetoric he campaigned on.
"I realize that I have little hope because there has been less change," El-Sayed wrote. "But I have to say now what I’ve been holding in throughout his campaign and what I think all of us have to admit: Obama was not the right choice — he just wasn’t the wrong one."
He went on to criticize the then-president for perpetuating war, violating civil liberties and carrying out more deportations than any previous president.
The Michigan Democrat has since walked back some of those criticisms, noting that it is possible to disagree with someone while still admiring them and praising how Obama operated under the circumstances he inherited.
DEM INSURGENT TURNS ON THE CHARM WITH PARTY ESTABLISHMENT AS SCHUMER LEAVES BITTER FEUD HANGING
Some, however, don’t buy that explanation.
Conservative commentator Jason Rantz said on a CNN panel that El-Sayed was setting aside his criticisms of Obama because he was in a desperate electoral position and needed to "try to bring in black voters."
Others, however, don’t think El-Sayed has a problem with Black voters at all.
Kandia Milton, a government affairs professional with deep ties to Detroit's African American community, told Fox News Digital that conservative claims that El-Sayed lacks appeal to Black voters are misguided.
"The great thing about Abdul is that he's not new to Detroiters. … And so Detroiters, once they understand his background, understand what he stands for and all the things that he's done in the past, you see greater enthusiasm for his campaign and his candidacy for Senate," he said. "He has been very active in getting out into the community. In fact, tomorrow we have a public meeting with Abdul at our church. Where he will be speaking to the community around, you know, the issues that he stands on and stands firm on."
El-Sayed’s rally with Obama is slated to begin at 5:00 p.m. and will feature Democratic gubernatorial nominee Jocelyn Benson and other Michigan Democrats. Attendees will be encouraged to cast early ballots in support of the Democratic ticket.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The El-Sayed campaign and representatives for the former president did not respond to requests for comment when reached by Fox News Digital on Wednesday.
Friday on CNN’s “The Arena,” Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) said “we have a commander in cheating” in President Donald Trump. Host Kasie Hunt said, “One reality here is that control of the Senate could come down to a very small
The post Cory Booker: ‘We Have a Commander in Cheating in Donald Trump’ appeared first on Breitbart.
Democrat Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan is narrowly leading renowned sports broadcaster Republican Michele Tafoya in the Minnesota U.S. Senate race, new polling shows.
The post Poll: Democrat Peggy Flanagan Narrowly Leads Republican Michele Tafoya in Minnesota U.S. Senate Race appeared first on Breitbart.
Democrats are hoping Barack Obama — their “closer in chief” — still has the magic.
The former president is spending Saturday rallying with the Democrats’ Senate and gubernatorial candidates in Cleveland and Detroit before heading south to Atlanta on Wednesday. And elected officials inside his party are breathing a sigh of relief, welcoming his blitz just 10 days before Election Day, with everything seemingly at stake.
“Obama’s our most potent weapon for sure,” said one House Democratic lawmaker, adding, “He remains the biggest star in our party. I think it’s a perfect time to send him on the road and activate him.”
Obama’s arrival on the campaign trail comes as Democrats make their closing messages on affordability and the economy and compete for voters in closely contested races. The Michigan and Ohio Senate races are currently rated as “toss ups” by MS NOW. Georgia’s Senate race is in the “lean Democrat” category.
“President Obama understands the stakes of this election could not be any higher, and that is why he’s doing everything he can to help Democrats up and down the ballot win on November 3,” Eric Schultz, a senior advisor to Obama, told MS NOW. “Our strategy is focused on maximizing his impact, especially where his voice can help move the needle in support of the next generation of leaders currently stepping up to lead.”
For candidates, his appeal goes beyond drawing a crowd: Democrats say Obama can deliver a closing argument that connects the high stakes of the election to voters’ everyday concerns, while drawing a sharp contrast with Republicans.
Plus, they say Obama is the closest thing Democrats have to match the magnetism Trump once had at the height of his packed MAGA rallies.
On the trail, the former president will focus on the high cost of living, including housing and energy prices. But he’s also highlighting corruption and abuse of power in Washington and the implications of artificial intelligence, according to a person familiar with Obama’s thinking.
The same person said Obama’s team worked with Democratic House, Senate and gubernatorial leadership to identify where his presence could be most beneficial in the most competitive Senate and gubernatorial races. The former Democratic president has raised over $15 million for his party, the person close to Obama said, through events, emails and mail campaigns.
His strategy has gone beyond rallies, filming more than two dozen endorsement videos to support Democratic candidates. Among those receiving the boosts are Iowa senate nominee Josh Turek and Troy Jackson, the nominee in Maine. He also made an appearance in Austin, Texas in May with the state’s Senate nominee James Talarico and gubernatorial candidate Gina Hinojosa.
For candidates on the trail, Obama brings an unmatched enthusiasm that other Democrats can’t replicate.
“He does a really good job making closing arguments: why this moment is so important, why the election is so consequential, why everyone’s vote matters as much as it does,” Rep. Greg Landsman, an Ohio Democrat, said. “There’s very few that do it better than he does.”
Obama is wooing voters for Michigan’s Senate Democratic nominee, Abdul El-Sayed, and gubernatorial nominee Jocelyn Benson. In Ohio, he’s stumping for Senate Democratic candidate Sherrod Brown and Amy Acton in the governor’s race.
In an election cycle dominated by concerns about affordability and the economy, Landsman said Obama can draw a contrast between Democrats’ approach to the economy and health care and the policies Republicans have pursued over the past two years.
“He has the ability to talk about what you have to do to build a strong economy, which he did, versus what’s happened over the last two years,” Landsman said.
President Donald Trump will also campaign in the Great Lakes State this weekend, rallying voters in Port Huron, Michigan, on Sunday afternoon. He’s embarked on a more than 15 state campaign blitz in the month leading up to Election Day, hitting red states like Kentucky, Montana and Alabama while also hosting multiple rallies in battleground states like Texas, Ohio, Georgia and Iowa.
Obama’s role on the trail extends beyond energizing the party faithful.
Democratic Governors Association Communication Director Sam Newton said his presence can bring attention to races, including those for the governor’s mansion, that receive less national attention than contests for Congress.
His ability to reach voters who might otherwise tune out politics is another reason his appearances matter in the final stretch before Election Day, Newton said.
“Part of why President Obama is the closer in chief is because he’s always had a special and unique ability to draw attention from voters who are otherwise apathetic or not necessarily paying attention,” Newton said. “Having him on the trail at this critical time when you’re trying to reach every possible voter is really important.”
And although Obama may be their “most potent weapon,” he may have some competition.
“He’s just a rockstar,” said another House Democratic member. “The only more powerful closer we could possibly have is Michelle Obama.”
Mychael Schnell contributed to this report.
The post ‘Most potent weapon’: Obama arrives to boost Democrats in battlegrounds appeared first on MS NOW.
A new report calling on the Church of England to stop wasting money on "extravagant" Net Zero and reparations projects and refocus on parishes echoes what front-line clergy have been saying for years, says Julian Mann.
The post The Church of England Must Stop Wasting Money appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.
Caroline Lissy
Before heading out to the bar on our final day of junior year at the University of Maryland, I sat in my empty college apartment with my friends, laughing over a dumb sitcom while scrolling on our phones.
Half of our stuff was in boxes as we were preparing to move into our very own house for the next school year. We fantasized about the parties we would throw and the decorating we would do.
But then, two months later, everything was turned upside down when one friend backed out and moved to Wisconsin to pursue a new career path. We were scrambling to find a replacement, but luckily, we weren't the only ones looking for a roommate.
When I was talking to my mom about the situation, my 24-year-old brother, who was three years out of college, was on the other end of the phone. Turns out, he was trying to find a place to live after his arrangements in Baltimore — about 40 minutes from my school — changed at the last minute.
My mom listened to both her children in a state of panic and was able to solve both problems with the most cruel suggestion a college girl could ever hear. "Why don't you move in together?"
Sure, that's just how every girl wants to spend her senior year of college. It was my parents' dream and my own nightmare.
My brother and I are close, but this still seemed like a crazy idea. However, we'd already signed a lease and didn't want to cover the rent for our friend who moved away. So, my brother and I talked on the phone, toying with the idea, before meeting up for lunch and deciding to officially become roommates for the first time since high school.
Despite any hesitations, once the summer ended, we all moved into the house together.
Suddenly, my senior year of college looked less like a coming-of-age movie and more like an episode of "New Girl." Three college girls and my older brother, all under one roof.
Caroline Lissy
Whenever my brother and I told people we were living together, we got some crazy looks. There were a lot of questions for him about how he could live with a bunch of college girls and function as a full-time adult. There were also a lot of questions for me, a full-blown party girl, about whether I would feel uncomfortable living with my overprotective brother.
We were living different lives and were on completely different pages — or so we thought. Surprisingly, after moving in, there were moments when I was thankful my brother was there.
When I had a falling-out with my roommates around the second half of the school year, and tensions grew, my brother was there to have my back. The living room no longer felt like a safe space, so I would go to his room instead.
Then, six months into our living arrangement, I got news that one roommate had received a full-time job offer, while the other was accepted into graduate school. Meanwhile, I was a straight-A student with four different internships, who was going to be completely jobless.
It felt unfair and difficult to speak with my friends about my unemployment and fear of adulthood since they couldn't relate. So, in these moments, I ended up going to my brother, since he had gone through the same situation a few years back when he was finishing school.
As I learned more about his life, his perspective helped me navigate my own experiences — and brought us closer, too.
Fast-forward a couple of months, and my brother and I spent the majority of our time at home laughing on the couch, watching reality television, and talking about our weekday struggles. While I was struggling to find a job, my brother was struggling with his work as an elementary school teacher.
When I was complaining about guys, he was telling me about his dating failures. Sure, living together while navigating our respective romantic lives was occasionally awkward, but we did our best to keep our flings from crossing paths.
Before long, we were both spending our Sundays hungover on the couch, debriefing our weekends. Although my brother may not have found the same common ground with the other girls I was living with — who were practically strangers to him — we were closer than we've ever been.
Caroline Lissy
Spending this much time with my brother alleviated any fears I had of adulthood.
His day-to-day life wasn't too different from mine, but while I was attending classes as a student, he was leading them as a teacher. Although I had no plans to become an educator, he gave me advice on navigating the workforce and figuring out how to be a grown-up.
More than anything, he showed me that postgrad life could still be fun. I could go to the gym and blast my music, grab drinks with friends, and binge-watch my favorite shows. The difference was that life felt a little more elevated, with new opportunities to step outside my college bubble.
At the end of the day, he taught me that the problems we face after college are not so different from the ones we had in college. Whether someone is newly postgrad, graduated 10 years ago, or is still completing their studies, we are all figuring things out in our own way.
We now live in different cities with our significant others, but spending a year together created a bond that makes my brother feel more like my best friend than a sibling.
We still talk every day, and now we get to laugh with each other's partners about the realities of living with us. After all, we've both been there.
West Des Moines, Iowa—Iowa voters may disagree on immigration, taxes, and the economy, but government surveillance is drawing opposition from across the political spectrum.
An Emerson College poll of 750 likely Iowa voters, conducted between late August and early September, found that 61 percent opposed police use of automated license plate reader (ALPR) cameras, compared with 26 percent in support.
The backlash comes as police departments across the state increasingly rely on surveillance technology supplied by private companies such as Flock Safety and Motorola Solutions. Their cameras record license plates and vehicle information, feeding searchable databases that allow law enforcement to piece together motorists' movements, including those of people suspected of no crime.
As Iowa's gubernatorial and congressional campaigns enter their final stretch, voters are increasingly pressing candidates on whether they intend to place limits on the technology. Jacqueline Thompson, an ordained elder in the Iowa Conference of the United Methodist Church and a self-described centrist Democrat, said she has been concerned about government surveillance for years.
"It's always been important to me [and] I've always thought that was a problem," she said before a campaign rally at a senior living community in Des Moines earlier this month. "So, when people started jumping on the bandwagon saying it, I was like, 'Hello, I've been here already!'"
Thompson pointed to two Democratic candidates, Nate Willems, who is running for Iowa attorney general, and Taylor Wettach, a candidate for state auditor, as having caught her attention with their emphasis on corporate oversight and access to government records.
For Thompson, the renewed attention to privacy is a welcome development in a political environment where Democrats and Republicans rarely find common ground. "It's kind of nice to hear the people come back to the middle [and discuss this]," she said.
Police surveillance technology has spread across Iowa faster than the rules governing its use.
A recent study identified at least 62 Iowa law enforcement agencies that had accessed other agencies' Flock databases, including departments that did not operate cameras of their own. Police departments can therefore search information collected well beyond their jurisdictions without having to install a single camera themselves. The study (led by Megan Graham, a clinical associate professor and director of the Technology Law Clinic at the University of Iowa College of Law) found significant gaps in transparency surrounding ALPRs.
The constitutional implications are already being tested in court. On October 1, a federal judge in Oklahoma ruled that a sheriff's deputy violated the Fourth Amendment by searching a motorist's location history through automated license plate reader systems operated by Flock Safety and Motorola Solutions without a warrant.
The search turned up more than 50 records of the driver's whereabouts across multiple states over a month. In the 38-page ruling, the judge ordered the resulting evidence suppressed, describing the technology as a form of "indiscriminate mass surveillance." The decision is not binding in Iowa, and legal challenges to ALPR surveillance still face an uphill battle, but it adds to the legal scrutiny of police tracking motorists without warrants.
The University of Iowa study also raised concerns about unauthorized database access, erroneous alerts, and the potential use of locally collected information for federal immigration enforcement.
Flock Safety says it has not provided U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement or Border Patrol with direct access to its systems. But the researchers found that local law enforcement agencies elsewhere in the country had conducted searches on behalf of federal authorities, effectively allowing them to obtain information without direct access.
Taxpayers are also footing the bill. Cedar Rapids reported operating 76 cameras at a combined average cost of more than $20,000 a month, according to the study.
Researchers struggled to determine the full extent of surveillance across Iowa. Some agencies refused to disclose the number or locations of their cameras, while others withheld records concerning unauthorized access or erroneous alerts, citing confidentiality.
The cameras are not limited to Iowa's largest cities. Becca Eastwood, deputy policy director at the American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa, said they have spread across large, midsize, and smaller communities, prompting a surge in opposition over the past year.
The backlash "has just exploded, like no other issue that I have seen in my time at the ACLU," Eastwood told Reason in an interview. Candidates running for state and federal offices are increasingly getting asked if they support police departments using ALPR cameras, she said.
Some local governments are already reconsidering their contracts. Indianola and Waukee suspended their Flock camera arrangements, Iowa Public Radio reported in August. Dallas County paused a planned rollout while awaiting guidance from state lawmakers. Ankeny, which operates 16 Flock cameras, is reportedly expected to reconsider a possible contract extension next year.
The backlash also cuts across the immigration debate. While concerns about federal immigration enforcement have helped draw attention to the cameras, critics argue the same surveillance infrastructure can be used against anyone, regardless of which party controls the government.
"This is a nonpartisan issue because people recognize that surveillance can be weaponized against anyone the government wants to weaponize it against," Eastwood said. "An increase in police surveillance impacts certain populations more, right now [but] nobody is immune."
The opposition is beginning to force Iowa's candidates to take positions on a technology that, until recently, attracted relatively little attention outside law enforcement and civil liberties circles.
Among the gubernatorial candidates, interviewed by Iowa Radio last month, Republican Zach Lahn has called for state-level regulation, arguing that the widespread collection of information about where people drive is unacceptable. Meanwhile, Democrat Rob Sand has expressed support for safeguards governing the collection and use of license plate data and said he would sign legislation if privacy concerns persisted. But he has also pointed to the cancellation of some Flock contracts as evidence that the market is responding to public concerns.
For now, neither approach offers much clarity on whether police should be required to obtain warrants before searching motorists' location histories or how far restrictions on data collection should go.
Ryan Johnson, a libertarian-leaning Republican who works as a machinist near Waterloo, said he could accept cameras in certain locations, such as downtown areas or near traffic signals. But he objects to their spread into residential neighborhoods and public spaces.
"Just having Flock cameras everywhere, [in] residential [areas], putting them at parks and pools, we don't need that," Johnson said while attending a Lahn rally earlier this month.
So far, some of the most concrete changes to ALPR practices have come from Flock itself. In August, the company announced that it would reduce its default data-retention period from 30 days to seven and require officers to enter a criminal case number or code for each search. The changes would not, however, require police to obtain a warrant before accessing the records.
Gary and Nancy Guthrie, a Democratic couple attending a Des Moines rally supporting Chris Jones for secretary of agriculture, remain skeptical of the cameras.
"I don't have a good feel for that," Nancy Guthrie said. "Personally, I'm very much against Flock cameras."
For all the attention the issue is receiving on the campaign trail, Iowa voters have yet to hear much about what legal limits candidates would actually impose on police surveillance.
The post Iowa Voters Don't Want Police or Flock Tracking Their Cars. Politicians Are Still Catching Up. appeared first on Reason Magazine.
En cette année 2026, véritable *annus horribilis* où l’impérialisme a fait arrêter des présidents légitimes comme Maduro au Venezuela et massacré des guides spirituels et religieux tels que Khamenei, l’Occident collectif continue de se poser en juge des « droits de l’homme ». La situation semblerait grotesque si elle n’était tragique. Toutefois, une analyse approfondie révèle toutes les ramifications de l’affaire, lesquelles s’inscrivent pleinement dans la vision colonialiste que l’Occident entretient à l’égard du reste du monde ; ce dernier est perçu comme une simple entité indistincte, vouée à être jugée, traduite en justice et soumise afin d’en extraire de la valeur. Dans cette optique suprémaciste, les peuples ne sauraient nourrir la moindre ambition de souveraineté ni prétendre à une quelconque représentation, car ils ne sont pas considérés comme des peuples capables d’accéder au statut de nations, mais simplement comme des multitudes vouées à la domination.
par Paolo HAMIDOUCHE
Peu importe que l’Occident soit en faillite face au Sud global. L’idéologie suprémaciste qui imprègne la rhétorique colonialiste des droits de l’homme continue d’agir, alimentée par de bonnes intentions. De bonnes intentions seulement, car les actes restent marqués par la violence et l’oppression. Ainsi, lors de la Troisième Commission de la 81e Assemblée générale de l’ONU, l’Occident — emmené par l’empire britannique déchu — a de nouveau attaqué la République populaire de Chine sur la question des « droits de l’homme ». Dans sa réponse, le représentant permanent adjoint de la Chine auprès des Nations unies, Sun Lei, a souligné le deux poids, deux mesures à l’œuvre, d’autant plus que ces normes — que les « maîtres » voudraient voir respectées à l’étranger — ne sont absolument pas appliquées en Occident même. Quelques jours plus tard, la porte-parole du ministère russe des Affaires étrangères, Maria Zakharova, a elle aussi remué le couteau dans la plaie en demandant à l’Élysée des nouvelles du « jardin enchanté » (référence à Josep Borrell) où les droits de l’homme sont suspendus à l’égard de « ses propres enfants » manifestant dans la rue. Enfin, l’Iran n’a évidemment pas manqué de souligner, par la voix de M. Baqaei, le changement de ton brutal opéré en quelques mois sur la question des droits de l’homme selon la zone géographique, avertissant : « Si les droits de l’homme et le droit de manifester sont des principes universels, leur définition ne devrait pas varier en fonction de la situation géographique du manifestant. »
Désormais, même la conception libérale des « droits formels » est remise en question en Europe sous prétexte de « guerre hybride » et de pressions géopolitiques. Il suffit de songer à Macron lui-même, en proie à la paranoïa face aux infiltrations prorusses, lui qui a fait part aux chefs de parti de ses craintes de déstabilisation il y a à peine quelques semaines. En Amérique, en revanche, la situation est peut-être pire encore : avec Maduro, on a agi de manière autoritaire, sans le moindre artifice rhétorique pour tenter de justifier le coup d’État. Et aujourd’hui, dix mois plus tard, on en rajoute.
Le FBI a en effet fait savoir qu’il retenait un nouveau chef d’accusation contre le prisonnier Maduro et son épouse Flores : « complot en vue de commettre des actes de torture ». Les procès politiques — lorsqu’ils ont lieu, contrairement au sort réservé à Khamenei, exterminé avec une partie de sa progéniture — visent la famille pour « complicité » et se fondent, de toute évidence, sur des chefs d’accusation variables. Le caractère personnel de la responsabilité pénale devient aléatoire, tout comme le chef d’accusation est fluctuant, lorsqu’une inculpation politique est engagée par un régime ; ainsi, le « complot en vue de commettre des actes de torture » devient une infraction où l’intention délictueuse et la faute s’étendent à tout l’entourage de l’accusé. Appelons donc les choses par leur nom : il s’agit d’un procès politique, et non judiciaire. Or, l’Occident, qui en cette année 2026 s’est adonné aux procès politiques sommaires, a l’audace de se poser en « maître » — pour ne pas dire en « juge » — et de pointer du doigt la République populaire de Chine pour son mépris de la vie humaine. C’est curieux, ne serait-ce que parce que le respect de la vie humaine exigerait la reconnaissance et le respect de la diversité des formes d’organisation des populations, de l’autodétermination des peuples et de tous ces principes dont l’Occident continue de se moquer au nom de la primauté du modèle de gouvernement libéral-démocrate. Un modèle qui, plus que jamais en 2026, s’avère n’être qu’une forme au sens littéral du terme, c’est-à-dire une simple « apparence extérieure ». En effet, cette démocratie libérale recèle en son sein des failles qui en compromettent désormais la survie même. Prenons pour exemple ce qui se passe en Roumanie où, après la victoire du candidat souverainiste indépendant C. Georgescu, les élections ont été purement et simplement annulées au motif d’une « manipulation des suffrages ». Aucun « juge » des sacro-saints « droits de l’homme » occidentaux n’a trouvé à redire au fait qu’une instance constitutionnelle puisse décréter quel suffrage est « manipulé » et lequel est « intègre ». La Cour européenne des droits de l’homme a même avalisé cette décision en déclarant irrecevable le recours de Georgescu. Par ailleurs, ces « juges » qui aiment discourir sur la situation politique d’autrui n’ont rien vu des conditions liberticides — dignes d’un réfugié — imposées à Julian Assange pour le « crime » de journalisme, avant qu’il ne soit contraint de faire amende honorable et de se retirer de la vie publique. C’est ce qu’a dû faire le président Georgescu en Roumanie, mais cela n’a pas suffi dans son cas. Le délit politique pèse manifestement plus lourd ; rappelons qu’un philosophe soulignait déjà auprès de ses pairs que l’enjeu, aujourd’hui, n’est plus d’interpréter le monde, mais de transformer l’état de choses existant. Pour celui qui s’engage directement en politique, il ne suffit pas de renier ses convictions et de se retirer de la vie publique, car son passé et ses relations continuent d’influer sur le présent.
En effet, la répression visant l’idéologie souverainiste en Roumanie s’est concentrée sur le dirigeant Călin Georgescu, au point de lui valoir diverses inculpations, interpellations et placements en détention provisoire (sic !), mesures qui ne se sont arrêtées ni devant son annonce de retrait de la vie publique ni devant sa personne. Comme je le rappelais précédemment, la caractéristique d’un procès politique est la disparition du principe de responsabilité pénale individuelle, car l’on a affaire à un régime politique qui s’attaque à une idée. Et comme le soulignait curieusement Medgar Evers — militant des droits civiques abattu d’un coup de fusil dans le dos par un suprémaciste dans la cour de sa propre maison, au sein de la patrie des « droits civiques » —, les idées ne s’arrêtent pas avec l’arrestation d’un homme, car « on peut tuer un homme, mais on ne peut pas tuer une idée ». On procède donc directement à l’arrestation et à l’inculpation de l’entourage immédiat, voire de toute personne professant la même idée. Ce n’est pas un hasard si le principal candidat de l’opposition roumaine, George Simion — qui porte l’idéal souverainiste dans ce pays —, a tiré la sonnette d’alarme ces derniers jours, se disant menacé d’arrestation après avoir perdu de manière inattendue le second tour des élections en mai 2025. Tout cela survient alors que C. Georgescu a de nouveau été inculpé et arrêté dans le cadre d’une enquête récente pour une fraude présumée. Alors que la Roumanie est privée de gouvernement depuis maintenant cinq mois — une impasse institutionnelle révélatrice d’une incapacité à gouverner, après l’annulation d’élections qui avaient pourtant conféré une légitimité claire à une formation politique, laquelle a été évincée une fois la victoire acquise —, l’acharnement de la justice roumaine à l’encontre de l’ancien homme politique a suscité des protestations populaires dans tout le pays ainsi qu’au sein de la communauté roumaine à l’étranger, déclenchant un élan de solidarité envers celui que l’on désigne comme « le président en exercice ». En somme, des événements singuliers se produisent au sein d’un Occident qui aime se poser en champion des droits de l’homme et de la démocratie libérale, mais uniquement chez les autres.
Publié à l’origine par Divergence Politique
© Mussa Qawasma/Reuters
Login