Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

The Epstein Saga: Chapter 1, Mr. Clinton

By Lorenzo Maria Pacini | Strategic Culture Foundation | December 24, 2025

A necessary introduction

I don’t usually write about these topics, but this time the matter is becoming interesting. The Epstein case is a Pandora’s box that reveals many power intrigues and the workings of certain geopolitical mechanisms currently in operation. For this reason, I will devote a series of articles – the Epstein Saga – to exploring some relevant aspects of this complicated affair.

First of all, it should be noted that the sources have been flawed, at least in part, from the outset. The files officially released by the US Department of Justice are mostly insignificant photographs, a large amount of .pdf files of what was found in Epstein’s residence; most of the files are obscured, with black stripes or squares concealing the identities and significant details of the material. This makes it very difficult to interpret the available material correctly and comprehensively.

The intent, however, is not to provide an exhaustive report on the entire affair—a task we gladly leave to investigative journalists—but rather to provoke reflection on the short- and long-term strategy behind this case.

The release of these files is part of a plan whose importance we still do not understand. It is a transformation taking place throughout the West, a transition from an old world of politics to a new one, through the fall of many masks.

The biggest problem, however, remains what will come next.

The context: what is happening these days

The most recent documents published on the Epstein case, in December 2025, include thousands of new records, photos, and investigative files from the Department of Justice and the House Oversight Committee. These documents contain images of prominent figures linked to Epstein, details of his travels and properties, grand jury transcripts, and investigative reports, including a 1996 FBI complaint about alleged child pornography and harassment. Many of the files have been heavily redacted to protect victims, but some pages have been completely blacked out, drawing criticism from both Democrats and Republicans for the lack of transparency.

Among the new revelations are photos of Epstein’s Little St. James Island, emails from his estate referring to high-profile figures, and a previously missing minute of video from his cell block before his death. The release also includes a transcript and audio recording of an interview with Ghislaine Maxwell, as well as additional court documents and flight logs. The Department of Justice has stated that several hundred thousand documents will be released in batches, with more expected in the coming weeks.

Some documents, including a photo associated with President Trump, were reportedly removed from the initial release, sparking further controversy and calls for full transparency. The latest batch of documents continues to fuel public and political debate about the responsibility and scope of Epstein’s network.

Hey, Bill!

The first person worth mentioning is former US President Bill Clinton.

In one photograph, he is sitting on a private jet, smiling relaxed and his face slightly flushed, while a young blonde woman is reclining on the armrest of his chair. In another shot, he appears reclining, shirtless, in a hot tub, his hands clasped behind his head; the face of the person next to him is covered by a black box. In other images, he is seen smiling next to Mick Jagger, wearing a shirt and elegant jacket. In yet another, he is swimming in a luxurious marble-lined indoor pool with Ghislaine Maxwell, a key figure in Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking organization. And then, smiling again, he is wearing a decorated silk shirt and standing side by side with Epstein himself.

The powerful American Democratic leader is undoubtedly one of the most mentioned VIPs in the Epstein documents. In the quarter-century since leaving office, Clinton has worked carefully to put the personal scandals that marked his presidency behind him. Today, at 79, he leads the typical life of a former statesman: traveling the world for conferences and commemorations, writing memoirs and political novels, and continuing the work of his philanthropic foundation. But that is not enough to escape the serious allegations that Epstein’s files quietly reveal, namely less institutional aspects of Clinton’s personality, such as his penchant for extramarital affairs, rash decisions, and a certain impulsiveness.

Already in 2017, Clinton had been at the center of numerous allegations, from sexual harassment to non-consensual exhibitionism to rape, allegations that Clinton has always denied. But what about now, with the files of the Epstein case?

In his memoir published in 2024, Clinton wrote that he had only two “brief encounters” with Epstein: one in his Harlem office and one at the financier’s New York residence. Between 2002 and 2003, Clinton admitted to flying several times on Epstein’s jet with his staff and Secret Service escort to support his foundation’s activities. In exchange for the flight, he explained, he devoted “an hour or two” to conversations about politics and economics.

“That was the content of our conversations,” he wrote. “Although those trips allowed me to visit foundation projects, getting on Epstein’s plane was not worth the years of questions that followed.”

The section closes with a sentence that is perhaps more revealing than the images themselves:

“I wish I had never met him.”

The Department of Justice has announced that additional documents will be made public in the coming weeks. The political aims of the first tranche of disclosures, however, appear clear: to shift attention away from Trump’s possible involvement in the scandal and focus the spotlight on Clinton instead.

The release of the images is unlikely to end Clinton’s political difficulties related to her relationship with Epstein. For months, the Clintons have tried to avoid appearing directly before the House Oversight Committee as part of the Epstein investigation. Such a hearing would be exceptional: no former president has testified before Congress since 1983, when Gerald Ford did so during the bicentennial celebrations of the Constitution.

The publication of the photos could increase public pressure for the couple to participate openly in the investigation and reignite questions about Clinton’s version of events, according to which he was unaware of Epstein’s crimes and severed all ties after the first reports of the investigation emerged in 2005.

On several occasions, not only the allegations but also the accusers themselves have been brought to the forefront of the political scene: in 2016, less than two hours before the second presidential debate, Trump and his campaign manager, Stephen K. Bannon, organized an impromptu press conference with three women who claimed to have been discredited or ignored by the Clintons after reporting sexual harassment. In 2019, a few hours after Epstein’s death in his cell, Trump relaunched an unsubstantiated conspiracy theory on social media linking Clinton to the financier’s death. Since then, Trump has continued to claim that Clinton spent a lot of time on Epstein’s private island, an accusation that the former president has always denied and that has also been refuted by Susie Wiles, White House chief of staff, and Ghislaine Maxwell herself.

Bill Clinton’s presidency was marked by several high-profile scandals, the most notable of which was the Monica Lewinsky affair. In the late 1990s, Clinton, then president of the United States, was accused of having an inappropriate relationship with White House intern Monica Lewinsky. After months of denials, Clinton finally admitted to having had “inappropriate intimate contact” with Lewinsky, calling it a personal failure and an error in judgment. His initial denials under oath led to accusations of perjury and obstruction of justice, culminating in his impeachment by the House of Representatives in 1998. Clinton was acquitted by the Senate but remained deeply compromised by the scandal.

In addition to the Lewinsky affair, Clinton faced other controversies. The Whitewater scandal involved allegations of financial impropriety related to a failed real estate venture in Arkansas in which Clinton and his wife Hillary were investors. Although the investigation did not lead to criminal charges against the Clintons, it consumed much of Clinton’s second term and contributed to a climate of suspicion surrounding his administration.

Among Clinton’s accusers was Paula Jones, who filed a lawsuit against him in 1994 for sexual harassment. The former president settled the case out of court for $850,000 without admitting guilt. Other women, such as Kathleen Willey, have made similar allegations, although Clinton has always denied any wrongdoing.

However, it is not only Republicans who consider the allegations of sexual assault and harassment to be a political burden for Clinton. Even within the Democratic Party, although there has been no dramatic distancing, there has been a gradual attempt to relegate the former president to the background. His presence in election campaigns has been reduced compared to the past, with some candidates preferring to avoid him altogether. At the 2020 Democratic convention, Clinton appeared for less than five minutes in a pre-recorded speech broadcast before prime time. Four years later, he returned to the stage, speaking for 27 minutes, far exceeding the allotted time.

With the recent publication of the photographs, Clinton’s critics seem to have found a new foothold to reopen a chapter that the former president has long tried to close. And this is only the beginning of the uncovering of the rot present in the American Democratic world… as well as in the Republican one.

December 24, 2025 Posted by | Corruption, Deception | , | Leave a comment

Bill Clinton is in the frame again, but this time it’s Trump who put him there

By Martin Jay | Strategic Culture Foundation | December 24, 2025

“The photos depict a web of unsavoury relationships and associations that complicate both Democratic efforts to keep the focus on Trump and the incumbent president’s desire to move on from the issue entirely,” reported the AP when the first major tranche of photos from the so-called Epstein files was released in mid-December.

Bill Clinton’s prominent appearance in the photos at least sheds some light on why Democrats, when in power, refused to lift the lid on the stinking Epstein affair—doing so would have been akin to shooting themselves in the foot, and Joe Biden obviously didn’t want to drop the Clintons in it.

Many might argue we shouldn’t be shocked to see Bill feature in this tawdry affair, given his reputation for an inability to control his carnal needs. The list of women he has been accused of assaulting is extensive, as are the lengths to which Hillary has gone to protect him.

Two things emerge from this latest batch of photos, which show Bill Clinton in close proximity to very young girls while spending time with Epstein. First, the Trump administration has decided that if the scandal is going to erupt, they might as well land the first political blow—and so they have reached for the lowest-hanging fruit: Bill. Second, the Clintons themselves will likely make a mockery of the entire corrupt U.S. political system by bypassing its legal institutions. They have already started this by ignoring congressional committee requests to appear and testify.

But in any case, the gloves are off. This is now outright war between Republicans and Democrats—and the latter will do everything in its power, using its deep contacts within institutions like the FBI, to get its hands on the Trump photos, which have, of course, been removed from the official release.

However, it is fair to say Clinton appears to have been even closer to Epstein than Trump was.

When Clinton was president, records show Epstein visited the White House multiple times. Later, after Clinton left office, Epstein assisted with some of the former president’s philanthropic efforts. Clinton flew multiple times on Epstein’s private jet, nicknamed the “Lolita Express,” including on a humanitarian trip to Africa in 2002 with disgraced actor Kevin Spacey and comedian Chris Tucker.

Even Democratic-leaning journalists in the U.S. note that Clinton’s personal weaknesses have always clashed with his public moralizing—and his association with Epstein serves as a stark reminder of that. This goes far beyond receiving oral sex from an intern in the Oval Office. It stretches back decades.

His 1992 campaign was rocked by rumours of an affair with Gennifer Flowers, which he denied at the time. His presidency was hit even harder when he was impeached in 1998 for lying under oath and obstructing justice after denying any sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky. He ultimately acknowledged an “inappropriate” affair with her.

Currently, it seems the pressure from Democrats to release the files—whether genuine or not—has backfired, as the trove of photos reveals numerous images of Clinton and Epstein together. In fact, these pictures of the two hanging out as old friends are arguably more damaging than the ones in which a young girl’s face has been pixelated—supposedly a DOJ initiative to “protect minors or victims.” That framing alone is a clean shot designed to hit its target, and for now, it is Clinton in the frame, facing media wrath even from traditionally Democratic-leaning outlets like CNN. Recently, conservative CNN commentator Scott Jennings suggested the files should be renamed the “Clinton Files.”

Of course, simply being photographed next to Epstein is not a crime and could, in certain cases, reflect innocent proximity. A number of famous faces appear in the first batch of files—alongside Clinton and Prince Andrew, there are also shots of musicians Mick Jagger and Michael Jackson.

What’s important to note is that Bill Clinton is known to share the same sexual compulsions as Prince Andrew, whom a royal biographer recently remarked on a podcast “needed to have sex three times a day.” Epstein reportedly referred to Andrew as the only person as depraved as he was when it came to young women. Clinton, like Andrew, has a history that can’t be airbrushed away—and the photos of him with young girls are a genie that cannot be put back into the bottle. It stinks.

Naturally, that won’t stop Democrats from calling this stunt what it is: a well-timed smear ahead of the midterms, where Trump is expected to likely lose both houses of Congress. Failing quick-fix policies on the economy and foreign policy—which are having a doubly damaging effect—will hit Trump hard at the ballot box, potentially rendering him impotent in the second half of his term. How long he can maintain the farce that the Epstein story is empirically linked to the Democrats is uncertain, though it is worrying that a war in the Middle East against Iran looks increasingly likely to be used as a tool to deflect blame from his lacklustre performance as a populist leader—one struggling to help blue-collar Americans and restore the country’s former global hegemony.

December 24, 2025 Posted by | Corruption, Deception | , | Leave a comment

US Navy effectively becomes a tool of modern piracy

By Drago Bosnic | December 24, 2025 

The political West has been conducting an unprovoked aggression against the entire world for at least half a millennium at this point. Whether through direct attacks and occupation or various forms of colonialism (that lasts to this day), the world’s most aggressive power pole has been a threat to every other country on this unfortunate planet. Although certainly not the only one, the primary tool of Western power projection have been navies, which is hardly surprising given the political West’s thalassocratic nature. Through naval supremacy, Western (primarily Anglo) powers have spread their colonial empires to virtually every corner of the world, exterminating the native populations along the way and settling in their lands.

Entire continents (such as North America and Australia) were secured through brutal genocide of the locals who now live in small, scattered communities (so-called “reservations/reserves”). The genocidal campaign continued throughout the Atlantic and Pacific, where numerous islands and maritime trade routes remain in Western hands to this very day. Controlling these areas is key to maintaining its stranglehold over global trade, as seen during the latest US attacks on inbound and outbound Venezuelan shipping. However, the Pentagon seems to be expanding this aggression to other countries trading with Caracas, including China, which is a major importer of Venezuelan commodities (particularly crude oil).

Namely, the US Navy and Coast Guard hijacked the “Centuries”, an oil tanker carrying up to two million barrels of Venezuelan crude to China. According to military sources, American forces, operating MH-60T helicopters and reportedly including a Maritime Security Response Team, led the raid. The oil belongs to the Chinese Satau Tijana Oil Trading company. In December alone, this is the third such incident where US naval assets effectively engaged in piracy, as these civilian ships were hijacked in international waters. The Chinese Foreign Ministry condemned the illegal raid, slamming it as a “serious violation of international maritime law and an illegal interference in legitimate global trade”.

This is an attempt to continue the policy of economic strangulation of Venezuela after the sanctions failed to produce the desired result (a color revolution that would bring a pro-American puppet regime to power). It comes less than a week after US President Donald Trump formally ordered the “total and complete blockade” of Venezuela, claiming that its government is now designated as a “foreign terrorist organization” (FTO). In his signature manner of communicating through the unchecked use of superlatives, Trump also bragged that the US Navy “completely surrounded” Venezuela with “the largest armada ever assembled in the history of South America”. Considering Caracas’ already difficult position, this is effectively a declaration of war.

Namely, Venezuela has a highly complex geographical and geopolitical position that makes lands routes largely unusable. Its coastline is the main lifeline that enables trade with the rest of the world, so Washington DC’s decision to engage in piracy against Caracas is a clear indicator that it doesn’t want to allow any sovereign nations to exist in the Western Hemisphere (especially now that the new US National Security Strategy and the restructuring of the Pentagon’s commands is putting an emphasis on the resurgent Monroe Doctrine). Venezuela is probably the most fiercely independent Latin American country, making it the No. 1 target for warmongers and war criminals in the monstrous American oligarchy.

What’s more, considering the fact that these pirates, thugs and goons in suits are terrified of China and its unprecedented development, they wouldn’t want to miss an opportunity to hurt Beijing’s interests. The Chinese economy, the world’s largest and most powerful since 2014, needs a constant supply of critical resources (particularly natural gas and oil). The US is unable to prevent Russia and other multipolar powers from trading with China, so it’s focused on disrupting this with other, more vulnerable countries, such as Venezuela. This is precisely why Beijing perceives the US, its vassals and satellite states as the primary threat to Chinese shipping and maritime trade (and naval security interests in general).

Obviously, the most glaring example of this is China’s breakaway island province of Taiwan, where a US puppet government is escalating tensions and jeopardizing Beijing’s basic national security interests. However, the Asian giant certainly understands that this is only one segment of the Western so-called “China containment” strategy that seeks to limit its ability to conduct unimpeded trade with the world. This is why China keeps building an ever stronger navy that can respond to such challenges. Namely, the US-led political West will undoubtedly continue to conduct its unprovoked aggression against the entire world unless prevented through the use of the only language it understands – force and violence.

It should be noted that this isn’t some spontaneous reaction to Beijing’s growth. And it’s certainly not limited only to the Trump administration. Namely, starting in the early 2010s, Barack Obama launched the so-called “Pivot to Asia” initiative to build up US/NATO presence in the Asia-Pacific. This continued during Trump’s first term, as well as the troubled Biden administration. In practice, this means that the warmongering American oligarchy pulls the strings regardless of who’s president. The Pentagon has increasingly stressed the need to launch “distant blockade operations”, the strategic goal of which is to cut off Chinese trade. This would give the US-led political West significant leverage over Beijing.

The same goes for Russia, whose shipping has been under attack for years, particularly when the Neo-Nazi junta is not doing so great on the battlefield in NATO-occupied Ukraine. Although the political West is attributing these attacks to the Kiev regime, it’s difficult to imagine the latter could conduct such operations thousands of kilometers away without ample Western support (if not direct orders and participation). This form of piracy gives the US, its vassals and satellite states perfect “plausible deniability”, meaning they can disrupt Moscow’s and Beijing’s economic interests without the need to engage Russian and Chinese militaries directly. This is precisely how piracy was used geopolitically until the early 18th century.

Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.

December 24, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, War Crimes | , , | Leave a comment

EU Morphing Into Its Own Worst Enemy – Viktor Orban

Sputnik – 24.12.2025

The decline of the European Union, rather than the Ukrainian conflict, is what really threatens to plunge Europe into war, Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban told the Magyar Nemzet newspaper.

The real reason of the existing risk of escalation, Orban argued, is the political, economic and social decline of Western Europe, whereas the Ukrainian conflict is more of a symptom of the current situation rather than its cause.

According to him, the process that led to this state of affairs started during the 2000s and was exacerbated by Europe’s inadequate reaction to the ensuing financial crisis.

Orban also noted that a war in Europe may break out soon, and that 2025 might have been the last peaceful year for the region.

He pointed out that the decisions that were made at the EU summit in Brussels last week were aimed at prolonging the Ukrainian conflict and continuing Europe’s confrontation with Russia.

Though there are powers in Europe that seek peace – like Hungary, for example – Orban warns that those European elites who seek war seem to be gaining an upper hand.

December 24, 2025 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Russophobia | , , , | Leave a comment

Next year’s election is a choice between peace and war, warns Hungarian PM Orbán

By Thomas Brooke | Remix News | December 23, 2025

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has said that recent anti-war rallies in Hungary serve to explain to the public what he described as decisions being taken behind closed doors as Europe prepares for war.

Speaking on TV2’s Tények program, he said European leaders at a summit over the weekend had effectively convened a “war council,” with speeches focused on defeating Russia, and argued that a growing divide has emerged between the United States and Europe since the inauguration of Donald Trump in January.

“Previously, it was unthinkable within NATO that the United States would say no to something and European states would still go ahead and do it,” the prime minister said.

Orbán warned Europe is much closer to war than most Hungarians realize, noting what he described as a German war plan to seize Russian currency reserves held in Western Europe, a move he claimed that would openly turn Europe into Russia’s enemy.

According to the prime minister, Hungary will now have a war-free Christmas, but the danger has not passed. He said the European Union wants to provide Ukraine with €90 billion over two years, despite having no funds of its own, and is therefore seeking loans from banks that he claimed would never be repaid. Orbán said Slovakia, the Czech Republic, and Hungary refused to provide guarantees for the borrowing. “This would have cost Hungarian families 400 billion forints. We will not pay that — full stop,” he said.

Orbán argued that Europe has more private-sector assets in Russia than the value of the funds it would have seized, adding that Hungary also holds significant corporate assets there. He expressed hope that U.S.-Russian negotiations would succeed despite what he called counter-campaigning by Europe’s political elite. He claimed that anti-war views now dominate Western public opinion as the economic costs of the conflict rise.

“From a Hungarian perspective, war is the most horrific thing that can happen,” he said. “We know how a war consumes a nation’s future and decades of hard work.”

The prime minister also argued that financial interests are pushing politicians toward conflict. He said bankers were driving Europe toward war, as they did before World War I, and claimed that within months the divide between Hungarian and European politics would become even clearer. Germany, he said, is pro-war, as is the European People’s Party, while his administration in Budapest represents what he called the party of peace.

“We will not allow ourselves to be dragged into war,” Orbán said, adding that Europe’s stated aim of being ready for war with Russia by 2030 turns Hungary’s upcoming elections into a choice between peace and war. “We — and I personally — will succeed in keeping Hungary out of the war,” he said.

Turning to domestic policy, Orbán spoke of what he described as a “tax revolution,” saying the government had launched fixed-rate home-ownership and business loan programs, restored the fourteenth-month pension, and introduced lifetime tax exemptions for mothers with two or three children. “By the end of the year, every program was launched. Only we are doing this in an era preparing for war,” he said.

On the opposition Tisza Party, Orbán said, “The Tisza Party’s program is Brussels’ program. But Hungary must not take the Brussels path — we must stay on the Hungarian path.” He added that Hungary’s low household energy prices could only be maintained through agreements with Russia, the United States, and Turkey, warning that EU plans to scrap the policy would amount to “brutal austerity” for families.

December 24, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia | , , | Leave a comment

Failed Diplomacy & Collapse of Ukraine

Glenn Diesen | December 22, 2025

Larry Johnson is a former intelligence analyst at the CIA who also worked at the US State Department’s Office of Counterterrorism. Johnson outlines why the negotiations are failing and what the pending collapse of Ukraine will entail.

Follow Prof. Glenn Diesen:

Substack: https://glenndiesen.substack.com/
X/Twitter: https://x.com/Glenn_Diesen
Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/glenndiesen

Support the research by Prof. Glenn Diesen:

PayPal: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/glenndiesen
Buy me a Coffee: buymeacoffee.com/gdieseng
Go Fund Me: https://gofund.me/09ea012f

Books by Prof. Glenn Diesen

December 23, 2025 Posted by | Militarism, Russophobia, Video | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Victoria Moves to Force Online Platforms to ID Users and Expand State Powers to Curb “Hate Speech”

Victoria’s push to unmask online users marks a turning point where the rhetoric of safety begins to eclipse the right to speak without fear

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | December 23, 2025

Victoria is preparing to introduce some of the most far-reaching online censorship and surveillance powers ever proposed in an Australian state, following the Bondi Beach terror attack.

Premier Jacinta Allan’s new five-point plan, presented as a response to antisemitism, includes measures that would compel social media platforms to identify users accused of “hate speech” and make companies legally liable if they cannot.

Presented as a defense against hate, the plan’s mechanisms cut directly into long-standing principles of privacy and freedom of expression. It positions anonymity online as a form of protection for “cowards,” creating a precedent for government-mandated identity disclosure that could chill lawful speech and dissent.

During her announcement, Premier Allan said:

“That’s why Victoria will spearhead new laws to hold social media companies and their anonymous users to account – and we’ll commission a respected jurist to unlock the legislative path forward.”

Under the proposal, if a user accused of “vilification” cannot be identified, the platform itself could be held responsible for damages. This effectively converts private platforms into instruments of state enforcement, obligating them to expose user data or face financial risk.

The Premier also announced plans to accelerate the introduction of the Justice Legislation Amendment (Anti-vilification and Social Cohesion) Act 2024, which had been due to take effect in mid-2026. It will now be brought forward to April 2026.

The law allows individuals to sue others for public conduct, including online speech, that a “reasonable person” might find “hateful, contemptuous, reviling or severely ridiculing” toward someone with a protected attribute. These protected categories include religion, race, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, and disability, among others.

This framework gives the state and private citizens broad interpretive power to determine what speech is “hateful.” As many civil liberties experts note, such wording opens the door to legal action based on subjective offense rather than clear, objective harm.

Weakening Oversight of Speech Prosecutions

Premier Allan also intends to remove a major procedural safeguard from Victoria’s criminal vilification laws: the requirement that the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) consent to police prosecutions. Without that check, police could independently pursue speech-based offenses, bypassing higher legal oversight.

This change would hand significant discretion to law enforcement in determining which speech crosses into criminality. Once enacted, it would mean that a person’s online comments could be prosecuted directly, without review from the state’s top legal office.

The “anti-hate” package extends beyond censorship. It proposes new powers for police to shut down protests in the aftermath of “designated terrorist events” and establishes a Commissioner for Preventing and Countering Violent Political Extremism to coordinate programs across schools, clubs, and religious institutions.

These measures, combined with the online anonymity restrictions, represent a substantial consolidation of state power over communication, movement, and association, all justified in the name of combating hate and maintaining safety.

Requiring companies to unmask users fundamentally undermines the principle of anonymous participation, a cornerstone of free expression, whistleblowing, and political organizing. Anonymity has historically protected vulnerable groups, dissidents, and small voices from retaliation.

Under Victoria’s proposal, those protections could erode rapidly as platforms are pressured to reveal identities or face litigation.

Laws targeting “hate speech” often extend far beyond their original purpose, evolving into broad speech controls that deter public criticism, satire, and unpopular opinions. Once enacted, such powers rarely contract.

More: Chris Minns Defends NSW “Hate Speech” Laws Linking Censorship to Terror Prevention

December 23, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Leave a comment

Who is the Pro-Israel Clique behind TikTok’s US Takeover?

By Romana Rubeo – The Palestine Chronicle – December 20, 2025

The short-form video social media platform TikTok, which has more than 170 million users in the United States and has become a central space for political discourse, journalism, and youth activism, finalized an agreement on Thursday to transfer control of its US operations to a newly created joint venture dominated by American and allied investors.

The deal, reported by multiple US media outlets including CNBC, Reuters, and the Associated Press, follows years of bipartisan efforts to force ByteDance, TikTok’s Chinese parent company, to divest from the app or face an outright ban under US national security legislation. The agreement is expected to close in January 2026.

Under the terms of the deal, TikTok’s US business will be placed under a new entity, commonly referred to as TikTok USDS, with majority ownership held by a consortium led by Oracle Corporation and the private equity firm Silver Lake, alongside MGX, an investment vehicle based in Abu Dhabi. ByteDance will retain a minority stake of just under 20 percent, the maximum allowed under US law, while existing ByteDance-linked investors will collectively hold a further share of the company.

Oracle will play a central role not only as an investor but also as TikTok’s so-called “trusted technology partner.” US officials have stated that Oracle will be responsible for hosting American user data and overseeing key aspects of the platform’s algorithm, an arrangement presented by the administration as a safeguard against foreign influence.

Is Israel Involved?

While no Israeli company or state-linked entity is formally involved in the ownership structure of the new TikTok US venture, the deal has sparked debate over the political affiliations and ideological positions of some of the corporate figures associated with the transaction.

Oracle, one of the principal investors, has long-standing ties to Israel through its leadership. The company’s chief executive, Safra Catz, is Israeli-American and has previously made public statements expressing strong support for Israel.

According to TRT, an email sent by former Oracle CEO Safra Catz to former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak was disclosed following a hack of Barak’s email account.

“We have all been horrified by the growth of the BDS movement in college campuses and have concluded that we have to fight this battle before the kids even get to college. We believe that we have to embed the love and respect for Israel in the American culture. That means getting the message to the American people in a way they can consume it,” Catz reportedly wrote in February 2015.

Oracle co-founder Larry Ellison has also been widely reported to have close political and personal relationships with Israeli leaders and to have donated to pro-Israel causes over many years.

According to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, Ellison is among the largest private donors to the Israeli army. Reporting on a Beverly Hills gala organized by The Friends of the Israel Defense Forces in 2017, the JTA wrote: “Larry Ellison, the co-founder of Oracle and its executive chairman, gave $16.6 million — the largest single gift in FIDF history.”

Ellison has also publicly described Israel as his own state.

According to Responsible Statecraft, the online magazine of the Quincy Institute, Ellison holds extensive interests across major news, television, and Hollywood media companies, largely through the recent takeover of Paramount by Skydance Media, a group now led by his son, David Ellison. The report also noted that David Ellison is considering appointing openly pro-Israel journalist Bari Weiss to a senior executive role at the newly acquired CBS network.

The report also mentioned that David Ellison is considering appointing openly pro-Israel journalist Bari Weiss to a senior executive role at the newly acquired CBS network.

Limitations on Freedom of Expression

Civil liberties groups and pro-Palestinian advocates have repeatedly warned that the restructuring of TikTok’s ownership could have consequences for freedom of expression, particularly regarding content related to Palestine and Israel.

These concerns come against the backdrop of repeated complaints from activists and journalists about the suppression or downranking of pro-Palestinian content across major social media platforms since the start of Israel’s war on Gaza.

Pro-Israel Organizations Welcome the Deal

At the same time, pro-Israel organizations in the US have publicly welcomed the sale, framing it as an opportunity to address what they describe as antisemitism and hostile narratives on TikTok.

For example, leaders of the Jewish Federations of North America (JFNA), one of the largest umbrella groups representing Jewish communities in the US, issued a public statement framing the proposed TikTok deal as an opportunity to tackle what they described as the “antisemitism” on the platform.

Israeli officials and commentators have also emphasized the strategic importance of social media platforms in shaping public opinion, particularly among younger audiences.

Even former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has recently claimed that young Americans, including young Jewish Americans, hold increasingly critical views of Israel because they are being misled by “pure propaganda” and “totally made up” videos on TikTok and other social media platforms.

Speaking at a summit in New York hosted by Israel Hayom on December 2, Clinton repeatedly suggested that widely documented information circulating online about Israel’s genocidal actions in Gaza is fabricated, and expressed concern that students “don’t know the history and don’t understand.”

Clinton described it as “a serious problem” that young people rely heavily on social media for their information, despite the fact that the videos, documentation, and reporting she dismissed have been independently verified by journalists, human rights organizations, UN bodies, and legal experts investigating Israeli war crimes and genocide.

Romana Rubeo is an Italian writer and the managing editor of The Palestine Chronicle. Her articles appeared in many online newspapers and academic journals.

December 23, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Leave a comment

German politicians and police on lobby trips to Israel

By Leon Wystrychowski | MEMO | December 23, 2025

Several recent investigative reports in Germany’s alternative media have revealed that Israel has been stepping up efforts to invite German decision-makers in order to exert influence and initiate business deals. The focus is primarily on senior politicians and high-ranking officials within Germany’s security apparatus.

Propaganda trips for politicians

Mondoweiss and Declassified UK recently highlighted that trips to Israel are among the “less well-known” yet widely used tools of the Israel lobby to influence senior politicians. The same appears to be true of Germany, as the left-wing daily Neues Deutschland has now exposed. According to the paper, as recently as last November some 160 politicians from across Germany and from a wide range of parties were invited to Israel as part of what was described as an “influence operation”, where they took part in a five-day programme.

The trip was so clearly a propaganda exercise that even hardline Zionists among the hand-picked guests later complained to the Israeli daily Haaretz that it had amounted to a “one-sided PR operation”. The itinerary included sites where fighting with the Palestinian resistance had taken place on 7 October 2023, the Holocaust memorial Yad Vashem, a guided tour of a factory belonging to the Israeli arms manufacturer Rafael, and the Old City of occupied East Jerusalem, under illegal Israeli control since 1967. Representatives of the Israeli government also reportedly made use of the opportunity to rail against the establishment of a Palestinian state and against a “two-state solution”.

As the authors point out, although the November delegation was the largest of its kind to date, it was by no means the first. Since 2014, politicians from all German parties – with the exception of the far-right AfD – have regularly been invited on similar trips. While such visits in the United States are organised by AIPAC and its affiliates, in the UK and Germany they are handled by organisations such as the European Leadership Network (ELNET) or the so-called Nahost Friedensforum (Middle East Peace Forum). In all three countries, these trips and their funding are frequently obscured, using a mix of legal and legally questionable methods. In 2024, for example, a senior Green Party politician in Germany resigned after it emerged that he had failed to declare such a trip as a donation.

German police on a “study visit” to an apartheid state

These trips are by no means limited to politicians. As reported by the German online outlet Itidal, Berlin’s police chief and newly appointed head of the “Association of Police Presidents in Germany”, Barbara Slowik Meisel, recently travelled to Tel Aviv at the invitation of the Israeli police. She was accompanied by senior officials from across Germany and from various police institutions. The Israeli side covered accommodation and meals, while the travel costs themselves were paid by German taxpayers.

The occasion was reportedly a “Multidisciplinary Emergency Management Commissioner’s Conference”. The visit had been preceded by a trip to Berlin in October by Israel’s police chief, Daniel Levi, during which he extended the invitation. According to Itidal, the conference featured extensive propaganda against the Palestine solidarity movement, which was portrayed as an extension of Hamas. There were also calls for increased repression of dissenting views and information online. In addition, no fewer than twelve arms manufacturers presented their products.

In this case too, the trip was not made public. As Itidal explains, this is not illegal, but it is highly unusual. Despite the frequently proclaimed “German Staatsräson” (reason of state), under which Berlin declares its firm and unconditional support for Israel, there appears to be a clear awareness of the moral and legal problems this entails. There is endless rhetoric about “Israel-related antisemitism” and “solidarity with Israel”; weapons are supplied for a genocide; the illegal occupation and apartheid condemned by the International Court of Justice are financially supported; Israeli expertise in surveillance, crowd control and warfare is utilised; and lobby trips are eagerly undertaken. Yet speaking about all this openly and transparently is something Germany’s political and security elites evidently prefer to avoid.

December 23, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , | Leave a comment

Israeli military superiority undermines US interests: Report

Al Mayadeen | December 23, 2025

When US President Donald Trump announced in November 2025 that he would approve selling advanced F-35 fighter jets to Saudi Arabia, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu immediately sought assurances from US Secretary of State Marco Rubio. The US was quick to affirm an unwavering commitment to preserving “Israel’s qualitative military edge” over all countries in West Asia.

And this commitment is not merely political; it’s the law. According to an analysis by Josh Paul, a former State Department director who spent over 11 years in the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs before resigning over Gaza policy in 2023, this legal requirement is producing outcomes that directly contradict US strategic interests in the region.

Writing in Responsible Statecraft, Paul draws on his insider experience to argue that what was intended as a tool for maintaining regional order aligned with American interests may now be fueling instability.

Cold war era policy

The concept of “Israel’s” “qualitative military edge” (QME) emerged in the 1970s as a mechanism to ensure a regional balance of power favorable to US interests by guaranteeing Israeli military superiority. Paul traces how this informal policy became codified in 2008 legislation that defines QME as “Israel’s” ability to “counter and defeat any credible conventional military threat from any individual state or possible coalition of states or from non-state actors, while sustaining minimal damages and casualties.”

The law requires the State Department to assess every major US arms transfer to West Asian and North African countries, from Morocco to Iran, to ensure it doesn’t threaten “Israel’s” military dominance. In practice, since Iran has not purchased US weapons since 1979, this applies exclusively to Arab states, effectively institutionalizing a regional hierarchy with “Israel” at its apex.

Paul describes a classified process involving multiple agencies and Israeli input: “At the annual Department of Defense Joint Political Military Group meeting, the Israelis typically make a presentation that includes a list of systems they deem threatening to their QME.”

Three options, three problems

When Arab countries seek advanced US weapons, Paul explains, the US government is faced with three choices, each with significant drawbacks.

The first is compensating “Israel” with superior technology. When the Obama administration proposed selling F-16s to the UAE in 2013, it had to simultaneously offer “Israel” advanced radars to detect those very aircraft. But this approach, Paul argues, directly fuels regional arms races, potentially violating other US laws that explicitly aim to “discourage arms races.”

The second option involves limiting sales through quantity restrictions, geographical constraints, or technological downgrades. But these limitations, Paul notes, can strain relationships with Arab partners who face genuine security threats.

The third option, denying sales outright to preserve “Israel’s” edge, may produce what Paul calls “perverse incentives.” Arab governments denied US weapons often turn to China, Russia, or France instead, reducing US influence over their defense capabilities and potentially introducing systems Washington cannot monitor or constrain.

This shift threatens the very regional order the QME policy was designed to maintain, as it allows competing powers to establish military footholds in West Asia.

The diplomatic cost of military dominance

Beyond arms sales logistics, Paul identifies a more fundamental problem: guaranteed military superiority may discourage Israeli affairs. “Because Israel remains assured that the United States will help it retain military superiority over the entire region, Tel Aviv may feel able to rely on such superiority rather than engaging in diplomacy,” he writes.

He argues that “Israel’s” recurring reliance on military force “arguably contributes to instability across the Middle East as a whole,” creating a paradox where the policy designed to enhance Israeli security and maintain a “stable” regional order may actually generate the very threats it aims to prevent.

An outdated framework?

Paul questions whether the QME framework still makes sense given recent diplomatic developments. Israeli officials themselves argued during the 2020 F-35 sale to the UAE that the country had become “an ally in confronting Iran” and the sale wouldn’t violate US commitments. Yet Paul notes from his government experience that pro-“Israel” advocacy groups like AIPAC continued opposing such sales “behind closed doors,” regardless of intensifying normalization efforts between Arab states and the entity.

More fundamentally, Paul argues that military technology is evolving in ways that may make the QME unsustainable. Military analysts increasingly suggest the world faces a revolution characterized by “low-cost weapons systems capable of overcoming high-tech capabilities,” a shift that could render “Israel’s” technological edge less decisive and the entire framework obsolete.

Paul concludes that US and Israeli policymakers should explore alternatives to what he calls “Israeli military hegemony and the inherent fragility that it brings to the region.” He argues that “diplomacy and compromise, including the need for real progress on Palestinian self-determination, promises the only real exit from the isolation that the QME has allowed Israel to impose on itself.”

For Paul, who left his State Department career over these very contradictions, the message is clear: a policy conceived to ensure a regional order favorable to US interests through military dominance may now be achieving the opposite, undermining both regional peace and American strategic influence in the process.

December 23, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Pentagon’s claim of China’s ICBM a pretext for US to upgrade nuclear power: FM

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian. Photo: China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs
By Liu Xuanzun and Liu Caiyu | Global Times | December 23, 2025

A draft Pentagon report claimed China has likely loaded more than 100 ICBMs in silo fields, Reuters reported on Monday. Chinese military observers noted that the Pentagon’s reports are full of speculation and aim to hype up the so-called China threat rhetoric.

Citing the draft Pentagon report, Reuters claimed that China has loaded more than 100 intercontinental ballistic missiles into three newly constructed silo fields near its border with Mongolia and showed little interest in arms control talks.

In response, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian stated on Tuesday that “I’m not familiar with what you cited as a US draft report, but we’ve been hearing the same story told and retold by the US to create pretext for speeding up the upgrade of US nuclear power and disrupting global strategic stability. The international community needs to be soberly aware of that.”

“The US, as a nuclear superpower sitting on the world’s biggest nuclear arsenal, must fulfill its special and primary responsibility for nuclear disarmament, further make drastic and substantive cut to its nuclear arsenal, and create conditions for other nuclear-weapon states to join the nuclear disarmament process. This should be a high priority for the US,” Lin said.

Lin noted that just last month, the Chinese government released a white paper entitled China’s Arms Control, Disarmament and Non-Proliferation in the New Era with a full overview of China’s nuclear policy and position on nuclear disarmament. China remains firmly committed to the policy of no first use of nuclear weapons and a nuclear strategy that focuses on self-defense.

China keeps its nuclear strength at the minimum level required by national security and does not engage in any nuclear arms race with any country, Lin said, noting that China takes an active part in the review process of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and meetings of the P5 (five nuclear-weapon states) mechanism, and maintains dialogue with various parties on nuclear disarmament.

Song Zhongping, a Chinese military affairs expert, told the Global Times on Tuesday that this report is fundamentally based on subjective speculation by the US and that its assessment is pure hype.

The US, possessing the largest nuclear arsenal, must take the lead in disarmament talks – a step that the country has yet to fulfill. Given that China’s nuclear arsenal is only a fraction of the size of America’s, there is no justification for China to join such negotiations at this stage, Song added.

Chinese military affairs expert Zhang Junshe told the Global Times that China’s nuclear capabilities are maintained at the minimum level necessary for defense, primarily intended for nuclear counterstrikes and retaliatory strikes in response to nuclear attacks. China has continuously and publicly stated its position clearly, which is that it will not be the first to use nuclear weapons.

The significant disparity in scale between China’s nuclear capabilities and those of the US and Russia makes it both unfair and unreasonable to demand China’s participation in nuclear arms control negotiations at this stage, Zhang said.

“So, by hyping this issue, the US is attempting to pressure China, with the ultimate goal of hindering the normal development of China’s national defense capabilities,” Zhang said.

Drawing China into arms control negotiations serves as a strategic pretext for the US to assert a balance of power, analysts said.

The US government in October cited Russia’s missile tests and China’s growing nuclear capabilities as a justification for a decision to resume nuclear weapons testing “immediately,” according to a Fox News report.

Last year, a Pentagon report also alleged that China is rapidly growing its nuclear arsenal and likely to have 1,000 nuclear weapons by 2030. It hyped that China has added at least 100 nuclear warheads to its stockpile over the past year and now has more than 600 in its inventory, according to Politico report.

In response, China’s Defense Ministry spokesperson Zhang Xiaogang said that the report had misinterpreted China’s defense policies, speculated about China’s military capacity development, flagrantly interfered in China’s domestic affairs, desperately slandered the Chinese military and exaggerated the so-called military threat posed by China.

On China’s development of nuclear weapons, Zhang stressed that the intention is to safeguard the country’s strategic security.

But the US, which has the largest and most advanced nuclear arsenal in the world, sticks stubbornly to a policy of first use of nuclear weapons, undermining international and regional peace and stability. He called on the US to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in its national and collective security policy to respond responsibly to the international community, the spokesperson said.

December 23, 2025 Posted by | Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Militarism | , | Leave a comment

US’ ‘100x More Powerful’ Battleship Dreams Vs. Hard Reality

Sputnik – December 23, 2025

The Trump administration has touted grand plans for a new class of surface warships that would carry nuclear-armed cruise missiles — along with an entirely new generation of aircraft carriers. The plan calls for at least 25 battleships, each larger than existing destroyers, bristling with hypersonic missiles, lasers, and electromagnetic rail guns.

President Donald Trump has vowed that the new battleships would be “the fastest, biggest, and 100 times more powerful” than any ever built, and would mark the return of a platform the US Navy stopped building in 1944.

However, that happened for reasons that haven’t changed much since: Cost, complexity, and usefulness in modern warfare.

  • There is currently no funding in the Pentagon’s budget for any of this
  • There are no finalized engineering plans, according to media-cited insiders
  • Designing and building a brand-new class of heavily armed warship is a decade-long affair
  • Proposed timeline of roughly two and a half years would be ambitious for a modest refit, let alone a nuclear-capable battleship
  • US shipyards are already behind schedule on every Navy ship currently under construction, many by more than a year
  • Operating a large fleet of complex, one-off ship classes would impose decades of costs for training, spare parts, and logistics
  • Chronic labor shortages, aging infrastructure, and supply-chain bottlenecks have been standard features of US naval shipbuilding for years
  • Former Navy officials warn that sustaining such a fleet could crowd out funding for everything else — from existing ships to next-generation aircraft — unless older vessels are retired early

Industry analysts were quick to note that the proposal also runs against the Navy’s own recent strategy, which emphasizes smaller, unmanned, and more distributed maritime systems rather than large, crew-heavy ships.

December 23, 2025 Posted by | Militarism | | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »