Pam Bondi Says Government Will “Go After” Hate Speech, Drawing First Amendment Criticism
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | September 16, 2025
US Attorney General Pam Bondi has stirred controversy with recent comments seeming to suggest that certain forms of speech could fall outside First Amendment protections, a stance that is fundamentally incompatible with the Constitution.
During an appearance on The Katie Miller Podcast, Bondi stated, “There’s free speech and then there’s hate speech, and there is no place, especially now, especially after what happened to Charlie, in our society…” She added, “We will absolutely target you, go after you, if you are targeting anyone with hate speech.”
Her remarks immediately drew sharp responses from across the political spectrum, with many warning that her approach opens the door to dangerous government overreach.
Bondi later attempted to narrow the scope of her original statements in a post on X, writing, “Hate speech that crosses the line into threats of violence is NOT protected by the First Amendment. It’s a crime.”
She continued, “For far too long, we’ve watched the radical left normalize threats, call for assassinations, and cheer on political violence. That era is over.”
The Foundation for Individual Rights (FIRE), a civil liberties group focused on free speech, fired back, stating, “There is no hate speech exception to the First Amendment.”
The Supreme Court has long protected even offensive or unpopular speech, with the Court’s view being that the “proudest boast” of America’s free speech legacy is “freedom for the thought that we hate.”
Conservatives who typically align with Bondi’s broader political positions also voiced concern.
Megyn Kelly, responding on X, wrote, “Hate speech is not prosecutable in America (which is good). Pam Bondi knows this.”
She suggested Bondi may have been referencing those plotting violence rather than those merely speaking in offensive terms. “Which would not be about the speech but the conspiracy,” Kelly added.
Britt Hume of Fox News was more direct. “Someone needs to explain to Ms. Bondi that so-called ‘hate speech,’ repulsive though it may be, is protected by the First Amendment. She should know this.”
Despite the wave of criticism, Bondi stuck to her position, reiterating her message in another post: “Free speech protects ideas, debate, even dissent but it does NOT and will NEVER protect violence. It is clear this violent rhetoric is designed to silence others from voicing conservative ideals.”
However, Bondi had stated that, “Hate speech that crosses the line into threats of violence is NOT protected by the First Amendment.”
What Bondi described, true threats of violence, is already illegal under federal and state law. Invoking the term “hate speech” in this context is misleading. The constitution does not recognize “hate speech.”
By framing criminal threats as “hate speech,” Bondi moves the public conversation away from clearly defined, prosecutable offenses and into territory where legal protections still apply.
The First Amendment does not carve out exceptions for offensive or disturbing language, and attempts to categorize speech as criminal based solely on its content or tone run into immediate constitutional limits.
The concern is that rebranding existing crimes with emotionally charged labels like “hate speech” creates confusion about what the law actually allows.
It suggests there is a separate, punishable category of expression based on viewpoint or perceived offensiveness, something the US legal system has thankfully repeatedly rejected.
For a state’s top law enforcement official to advance that view undermines public understanding of both free speech protections and the scope of legitimate criminal enforcement.
Charlie Kirk has been one of the most vocal opponents of these censorship regimes. In a 2024 post on X, he made his position plain: “Hate speech does not exist legally in America. There’s ugly speech. There’s gross speech. There’s evil speech. And ALL of it is protected by the First Amendment. Keep America free.”
‘Bot army’ flooding social media with pro-Israeli propaganda: Report
Press TV – September 16, 2025
An American “public relations” firm closely allied with the Democratic Party is in contract with the Israeli regime to flood social media platforms with pro-Tel Aviv propaganda, using a “bot army,” a report says.
The two sides’ contract, now in the fifth month of its conclusion, is worth a whopping $600,000, Sludge, an investigative journalism outlet, reported on Monday, citing a Foreign Agents Registration Act filing.
The report identified the company as Washington-based SKDKnickerbocker LLC that subcontracts through French “PR firm” Havas under its parent Stagwell Global, a similar US-based company.
The “bot-based program” targets the most popular social media platforms, including Instagram, TikTok, LinkedIn, and YouTube.
The program is tasked with “flooding the zone” with content promoting the Israeli foreign ministry’s pro-regime messaging.
“Automated tools will increase the visibility of targeted posts, while SKDK also coaches Israeli ‘civil society spokespeople,’ tests social media influencers, and arranges outreach to ‘journalists’ at outlets like BBC, CNN, Fox, and the Associated Press,” the report added.
History repeats itself
The campaign, Sludge wrote, “mirrors influence tactics previously documented in pro-Israel campaigns.”
Earlier this month, a report revealed a subversive Israeli intelligence foray aimed at recruiting Iranians, which used an American comedian as its cover and the exiled son of Iran’s former US-backed monarch as a central pawn.
Grayzone, an independent news website, carried the report on September 8, saying the campaign sought to bait Iranian nuclear scientists and security officials among their other compatriots by enticing them to turn on their own country’s Islamic establishment.
The bid primarily used ads placed by Atlanta-based comedian and influencer Desi Banks, who enjoys a nine-million-plus Instagram following.
Sludge also cited a May 2024 Al Jazeera investigation showing how AI-powered “superbots” were targeting pro-Palestinian accounts, replying rapidly with pro-Israeli messages, and using large language models to appear human.
The outlet, meanwhile, delved into the roots of the SKDK and related pro-Israeli figures.
The SKDK was registered earlier this year as a “foreign agent” for the Israeli regime, making Tel Aviv its sole foreign regime client. The company works on outreach to platforms like NPR, MSNBC, Fox News, and X to promote the Israeli narrative.
Also, according to the report, Stagwell was founded by a longtime ally of the Israeli regime’s ruling Likud party, Mark Penn. The company also operates “Targeted Victory,” a Republican-aligned affiliate working on similar outreach for Havas.
Israel launches ground offensive in Gaza City
Press TV – September 16, 2025
Gaza City was engulfed in flames before dawn on Tuesday as Israel launched a new ground offensive, killing dozens of civilians and burying families under the rubble.
Palestinian residents reported heavy strikes across the city overnight, when the military unleashed a massive bombardment as its ground forces moved deeper into the territory’s largest urban hub.
The military said the number of soldiers would rise in the coming days to confront up to 3,000 Hamas fighters in the area. According to a military official, the offensive is “the main phase of the plan for Gaza City.”
Gaza City’s Shifa Hospital said it received the bodies of 20 people killed in a strike that hit multiple houses in a western neighborhood, with another 90 wounded arriving at the facility on Tuesday.
“A very tough night in Gaza,” Dr. Mohamed Abu Selmiyah, director of Shifa Hospital, told The Associated Press.
“The bombing did not stop for a single moment,” he said. “There are still bodies under the rubble.”
Witnesses said the regime’s overnight bombing reduced a residential block in the north of Gaza City to mounds of rubble.
Palestinian resident Abu Abd Zaqout told AFP that about 50 people — including women and children — were inside a residential building when it was struck overnight.
“I don’t know why they bombed it,” he said. “Why kill children sleeping safely like that, turning them into body parts? We pulled the children out in pieces.”
Meanwhile, Israel’s minister of military affairs, Israel Katz, said in a post on X that the military “strikes with an iron fist” at what he described as “terrorist infrastructure” in Gaza City.
He said the offensive is aimed at creating “the conditions for the release of the hostages and the defeat of Hamas.”
“We will not relent and we will not go back — until the completion of the mission,” Katz threatened, saying, “Gaza is burning.”
Israel has long accused Hamas of building military infrastructure inside civilian areas, especially in Gaza City — allegations the resistance group repeatedly denies.
The overnight offensive came only hours after US Secretary of State Marco Rubio put the Trump administration’s full support behind Benjamin Netanyahu in a visit to al-Quds on Monday.
Rubio said Washington’s priorities were the liberation of Israeli hostages and the destruction of Hamas.
However, the UN rapporteur on human rights in the occupied territories, Francesca Albanese, said the aim of the Gaza City offensive is to make it uninhabitable.
“This is the last piece of Gaza that needs to be rendered unlivable,” Albanese said on Monday.
Residents still in the city were warned they must leave and head south.
Washington based think tanks advocate war on Lebanon
By Robert Inlakesh | Al Mayadeen | September 16, 2025
Despite the approval of a plan submitted on September 5, by the Lebanese Armed Forces, to disarm Hezbollah, the United States and Israeli regime are not satisfied with the move. What they had hoped for was an aggressive and destructive plot that could have plunged the nation into chaos.
The United States has been pushing the Lebanese government to order the full disarmament of Hezbollah, doing so without providing any tangible guarantees or even allowing Beirut to draft its own national defence strategy. Simply put, the US Trump administration hopes to pursue, through diplomacy, what the Israelis failed to achieve during their war of aggression against Lebanon.
While Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam has decided to take his orders from the United States on the question of disarmament, it is clear that the plan which was recently adopted by the Lebanese Armed Forces does not meet the standards set by the United States, and by extension, the Israelis.
The plan is supposedly divided into four separate phases, beginning in south of the Litani River. However, the plan was not revealed publicly, and there appears to be no specific deadline as to when Lebanon will achieve its stated mission. Everything has remained quite vague.
This predicament has now sparked outrage amongst Washington-based pro-war think tanks that have a significant impact on the US’s foreign policy decisions.
Take the Zionist Lobby cut out think tank, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), for example. Their most recent article on the issue is titled “Without a Hezbollah Disarmament Deadline, Lebanon Should Face Repercussions”.
The WINEP piece argues that the US government should pressure the Lebanese Army to take escalatory measures that would inevitably result in violent armed clashes with Hezbollah, including seizing a military position north of the Litani River as an initial step toward disarmament, and setting a specific deadline for this process.
The author of the piece, Hanin Ghaddar, writing for the Zionist think tank, advocates weaponising US aid to Lebanon by making it conditional on disarmament demands. She goes even further, arguing that the US should go after Lebanese Parliament Speaker, Nabih Berri, in order to turn the Amal Movement against Hezbollah and to destroy the Shia alliance in the upcoming elections. It is also noted that additional sanctions should be used to the effect of going after Lebanese Shia elected officials. This is a clear call for election interference.
Another notable piece was recently published by Haaretz and reposted by the infamous Zionist think tank, the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD). The author of the piece, entitled “Why Israel Shouldn’t Celebrate Lebanon’s Promise to Disarm Hezbollah Just Yet”, was written by FDD senior fellow David Daoud.
In this article, the FDD think tank senior fellow argues that the Israeli regime should continue bombing Hezbollah sites throughout Lebanese territory and aim at significantly weakening the Lebanese resistance group in order to pave the way towards the Lebanese Armed Forces being able to carry out the rest of the job.
In the WINEP piece, delusional depictions of the Lebanese military’s capabilities when it comes to fighting a war with Hezbollah, use the likes of LAF’s operation in the Nahr al-Bared refugee camp, back in 2007, and the Army’s clashes with ISIS – in which Hezbollah fought alongside them – as examples of how they could prove successful. However, Daoud is less delusional and sets forth a strategy that allows for the Israelis to do all of the heavy lifting instead.
The Atlantic Council think tank has meanwhile been promoting the false idea that the Lebanese public, with the exception of the nation’s Shia population, are in favour of Hezbollah disarmament and that the resistance group has been all but defeated. Completely contradicting this notion however, is the fact that 58% of the Lebanese public polled said they oppose Hezbollah’s disarmament without a national defense strategy.
Even more revealing, however, was that the data published by Lebanon’s Consultative Center for Studies and Documentation exposed that 71.7% said they don’t believe the Lebanese army could defend the country from an Israeli attack, and 76% answered that they didn’t believe Lebanon’s diplomatic maneuvers could stop the Zionist regime from attacking.
The gap here, between 58% that opposed disarmament and the 71.7% to 76% that answered the way they did above, indicates that the respondents answered the disarmament question based upon emotion rather than logic, which could largely be attributed to the effectiveness of anti-Hezbollah propaganda.
Other Washington-based think tanks have also been active on this issue, including the most influential think tank over the Trump administration, the Heritage Foundation. In its case, it openly praised US President Donald Trump for his efforts to expel UNIFIL forces from Lebanon, which will occur under a phasing out approach come the end of 2026.
Across all of the prominent Washington-based Zionist think tanks, the message appears uniform, they all seek further pressure upon Beirut in order to force it to disarm Hezbollah, against the wishes of the majority of the Lebanese public.
The US is directly meddling in Lebanon’s affairs and its moves, including threatening Beirut with another Israeli war, are tantamount to violations of the nation’s sovereignty, in addition to being anti-democratic. For all the talk about “sovereignty”, Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam and his ilk have remained silent about the US imposing its will on Lebanon, nor do they have a strategy to liberate their territory in the south, or even stop the daily Israeli airstrikes carried out on Lebanese lands.
Qatar After the Airstrikes: Assessing Viable Responses to Israeli Aggression
By Abbas Hashemite – New Eastern Outlook – September 16, 2025
Since the Israeli attack on Doha, the Arab world has been looking for a collective response. However, the Arab states have limited viable options available due to their over-reliance on the US.
Israel’s Attack on Doha: A Dangerous New Precedent in the Gulf
The Israeli attack on Qatar last week astonished the whole world. Doha has long been seen as a mediator, as it played a constructive role in establishing peace between different conflicting parties, including the United States and the Taliban. It was also playing a mediatory role between Hamas and Israel. Hamas leadership was present in Doha to discuss the peace proposal presented by the Trump administration. However, the Israeli government conducted airstrikes in Doha on the building in which the Hamas leadership was present. Although the Hamas leadership survived the attack, these airstrikes raised serious concerns about the sovereignty and security of the Gulf States.
The Gulf countries have largely been reliant on the US alliance for their security. The latter supplies most of the arms and weapons to these countries. However, the US air defense system did not intercept any Israeli missiles during the recent strikes in Doha, implying that the US security guarantees to the Gulf States are selective and are only motivated to counter threats emanating from Iran. Moreover, this demonstrates that the US green-lighted the Netanyahu administration to conduct these criminal strikes in an affluent neighborhood in Doha.
Although the Trump administration has denied all the claims about the US support to the Israeli government in these strikes, and it has condemned this move in the United Nations, the US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, is on a two-day visit to Israel to ensure continued US support to the Zionist state. This further demonstrates that the United States prioritizes Israel over its Arab allies, and all its airbases in the Gulf countries are actually to protect Israel against the regional threats.
Limited Military Options and Growing Frustration
Qatar’s Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani described the Israeli attacks on Hamas leadership in Doha as “state terrorism that is being exerted by someone like Netanyahu.” He further stated, “I think that we have reached a decisive moment. There should be retaliation from the whole region in the face of those barbaric actions that only [reflect] one thing: It reflects the barbarism of this person that is leading the region, unfortunately, to a point where we cannot address any situation, and we cannot repair anything, and we cannot work within the frameworks of international laws. He just violates all those international laws.”
A strong response by Qatar and Arab states is mandatory to ensure their sovereignty and security in the future. However, given the Arab states’ overreliance on the US security guarantees and arms, they are left with very few options to retaliate against Israel. A military response to Israel is impossible for the Gulf States, as they do not possess enough military capabilities. Moreover, the US would never allow them to collectively attack Israel. Therefore, a collective military response could lead to internal security threats due to the presence of the US airbases in these countries.
Strategic Realignment: From US Dependence to Eastern Alliances
The Gulf States, however, could push Israel towards regional diplomatic isolation. The UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan established diplomatic relations with Israel in 2020, following the Abraham Accords, which were mediated by the United States. The UAE summoned the Israeli diplomat to denounce these airstrikes in Doha. Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the President of the UAE, visited Qatar within 24 hours of the attack to discuss the situation. The UAE and other Arab states could limit or downgrade their diplomatic relations with Israel in retaliation for these attacks.
Qatar has already lobbied for a unanimous UN statement condemning the illegal Israeli attack in Doha. It will also host an Arab-Islamic summit in Doha to coordinate a collective response to Israeli attacks. Leaders from almost all the Islamic countries, including KSA, Pakistan, Turkey, and Iran, are expected to attend this extraordinary summit. Moreover, the Gulf States could also join the International Court of Justice’s cases against Israel, further building pressure on the Zionist state to halt its genocide and occupation in Palestine.
Gulf States, especially Qatar, the UAE, the KSA, and Kuwait, hold significant economic leverage over Israel due to their energy resources. They could use their economic leverage to impose trade and economic sanctions on Israel by boycotting companies that have stakes in the Israeli economy. Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE pledged a collective investment of $3 trillion in the US economy during Trump’s last visit to the region. The intention behind this investment was to strengthen relations with the United States. However, the recent failure of the US to protect Qatar from Israeli attack could result in the Gulf nations’ quest for new global allies.
Over the past few years, the world has witnessed unprecedented economic growth in Russia and China. In 2023, China brokered a peace deal between Iran and Saudi Arabia to normalize their bilateral diplomatic relations. Russia, on its part, has emerged as a strong military and diplomatic power on the global stage. The two new superpowers of the world are already aligned with the Palestine policy of the Muslim world. Moreover, they possess unmatchable military power. The recent US failure to protect Qatar from Israeli attacks has provided the Arab states with a new direction to expand their diplomatic and strategic ties. They could engage with Russia and China to strengthen their defense sector and expand their diplomatic clout. This would not only prove detrimental for Israel but would also hurt the US regional and global interests.
Аbbas Hashemite – is a political observer and research analyst for regional and global geopolitical issues. He is currently working as an independent researcher and journalist
Iran clarifies stance after joint Doha statement, rejects ‘two-state’ solution to Palestinian issue
Press TV – September 16, 2025
Iran has clarified its stance on a joint statement from a Doha summit held in the wake of the Israeli regime’s assault on Qatar, rejecting the “two-state” solution concerning the Palestinian issue and and US’s self-proclaimed “peace” efforts.
The Foreign Ministry issued the remarks on Tuesday, distancing the Islamic Republic from references made in the statement to the so-called “two-state solution,” reiterating support for Palestinians’ right to resistance, and ruling out any prospect of recognition of the regime.
It also dismissed the existence of any genuine intention on the part of Washington to resolve the situation created by the regime’s barbarity throughout the West Asia region, including across the occupied Palestinian territories.
‘Two-state solution’ a non-starter
Reasserting the Islamic Republic’s continued unwavering support for the Palestinian cause of liberation from Israeli occupation and aggression, the ministry said the country would under no circumstances abandon its staunch belief that Palestinians were absolutely entitled to exercise their inherent right to self-determination.
Therefore, Tehran keeps holding fast to its principled position that the only “true and sustainable” solution to the Palestinian issue rests in the creation of a “unified democratic government” in the occupied territories.
Such a government should receive its mandate from the outcome of a referendum partaken by all Palestinians inside the territories as well as the Palestinian diaspora, and, hence, end up representing “all Palestinians,” the ministry said.
Therefore, it said, Tehran utterly dismisses the “two-state solution,” supported by the United States and its allies, and the concepts proposed as part of such “solution,” including those mentioned in the Doha statement.
It named one of those concepts as “establishment of the State of Palestine along the lines of June 4, 1967,” which ignores the vast Palestinian territories that the regime had already occupied in 1948 and continues to occupy.
Also, the Islamic Republic spurns the idea that Palestinians’ future capital should be confined to just the eastern part of the holy occupied city of al-Quds, the ministry added.
“The so-called ‘two-state’ solution would not resolve the Palestinian issue,” it specified.
‘Israeli barbarity necessitates resistance’
Iran, meanwhile, continues to uphold Palestinians’ entitlement to employ “whatever necessary vehicle” towards realizing their inalienable right to self-determination and ridding themselves of foreign colonialism, the ministry stated.
Those rights that are enjoyed by “any peaceable nation” include the right to resist, it noted, adding, “Given the barbarity exercised by the occupying regime’s forces, nothing should serve to restrict this right.”
“It is also our shared duty under international law to support this aspiration,” it said, and also repeated Tehran’s categorical rejection of any potential recognition of the regime.
‘US no ‘peace’ partner’
Finally, the ministry underlined that the policies and actions of the United States have contributed to the continuation and backing of the Israeli regime’s aggression against the Palestinian people, rather than subduing it.
“In light of this reality, the Islamic Republic holds that the United States cannot be recognized or regarded as a credible or impartial party in advancing a just and lasting peace in this conflict.”
“We request the summit’s secretariat to include the Iranian delegation’s reservations in its final report.”
The emergency Arab-Islamic summit was held in the Qatari capital on Monday to address the regime’s recent deadly attacks on the city, which targeted the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas’ leadership, among Tel Aviv’s other atrocities throughout the West Asia region.
Grossi, again? Iran’s new IAEA deal reeks of JCPOA 2.0
By Fereshteh Sadeghi | The Cradle | September 15, 2025
Three months after the Israeli occupation state’s aerial assault on Iran, the Iranian government reached a new deal with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The agreement, and the fact that IAEA chief Rafael Grossi and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi offered conflicting interpretations of it, has outraged Iranian political circles and the public, many of whom view Grossi as a facilitator of Israeli aggression. Araghchi is now accused of concealing details of the agreement and repeating the mistakes of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) nuclear deal.
Iran signs surprise deal with IAEA after Israeli strikes
During a brief visit to Egypt on 12 September, Araghchi shook hands with Grossi as they announced a deal on the resumption of UN inspections of Iran’s nuclear program. The agreement was significant as Tehran had halted its cooperation with the IAEA in the wake of the Israeli aggression in June, and a parliamentary vote had suspended international inspections. The vote had been ratified after the cessation of the 12-day war between Iran and the occupation state in late June, amid accusations that the IAEA was sharing intelligence on their nuclear facilities and scientists with Israel and the US. Iranian officials claimed two IAEA inspectors smuggled classified documents on the Fordow nuclear site to Vienna. Iran revoked their licenses, but the agency took no punitive action. Fordow was later bombed by US B-52 bombers. Grossi’s 12 June report to the IAEA Board of Governors, which accused Iran of failing to meet its safeguards obligations, is widely seen as having paved the way for the 12-day Israel–Iran war that started one day after on 13 June. The agency’s refusal to condemn Tel Aviv’s attacks deepened Iranian distrust.
E3 pushes for sanctions as Iran tries to avoid snapback
As Iran withdrew from indirect nuclear talks with the US and halted cooperation with the IAEA, Germany, France, and Britain (the E3) announced their intention to reinstate UN sanctions. Those sanctions had been suspended under the 2015 JCPOA. The E3 said it would trigger the snapback mechanism before its expiry in mid-October, claiming that Iran had failed to uphold its commitments.
Seeking to avoid further sanctions, Iran agreed to engage the E3 in talks in late August. In exchange for Iranian cooperation with the IAEA, clarification on 440 kilograms of highly enriched uranium stockpiled before the Israeli attack, and a return to US negotiations, the Europeans offered to extend the snapback deadline by six months. Iran rejected the offer. The E3 then launched the snapback process but gave Iran a 30-day deadline to comply with the UN atomic watchdog’s demands. A week later, IAEA inspectors were scheduled to visit Iran to supervise fuel replacement at the Bushehr nuclear power plant. Araghchi reassured lawmakers that the Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) had authorized the inspectors’ visit and insisted all cooperation would comply with the law banning extensive IAEA engagement. A source close to the Iranian Foreign Ministry tells The Cradle that inspectors had also planned to visit other facilities, including the Tehran Research Reactor, but those plans were quietly scrapped under parliamentary pressure. Then, without warning, the Araghchi–Grossi agreement in Cairo was revealed, shocking Iranian society. The deal guarantees renewed Iranian cooperation with the IAEA.
Parliament sidelined, backlash intensifies
One day before Araghchi’s Cairo trip on 9 September, parliamentarian Hussein-Ali Haji-Deligani warned that a new IAEA deal was imminent – one that violated Iranian law and did not protect national rights. He warned Araghchi against signing or risking impeachment. Once news of the agreement broke, reports surfaced that the Iranian legislature, the Majlis, would close for three weeks for lawmakers to visit their constituencies. Critics alleged this was a calculated move to shield the Cairo agreement from scrutiny.
While the Foreign Ministry and the SNSC remained silent, Grossi publicly elaborated:
“The technical document would include access to all facilities and installations in Iran and contemplates the required reporting on all the attacked facilities including the nuclear material present at those and that will open the way for respective inspections and access.”
That statement drew sharp rebuke. Tehran MP Amir-Hussein Sabeti said, “This passive and weak settlement to renew cooperation with the IAEA contradicts national interests, paves the way for new [Israeli] strikes, and clearly violates the law.”
In a televised debate, Araghchi attempted to allay the criticism, claiming the deal was approved by the SNSC. He dismissed Grossi’s remarks as “his own interpretation of the text”, adding, “from now on, the IAEA should request access to each nuclear site and the SNSC will review the requests case by case.”
The Iranian top diplomat stressed that “as long as Iran has not implemented environmental and safety measures at the attacked facilities, the IAEA will not be granted permission to visit them.” He insisted the agreement had nothing to do with the E3’s ultimatum; nevertheless, he contradicted himself by stating, “This settlement will be declared null and void if the Snapback mechanism goes into effect.”
Araghchi faces mounting calls for impeachment
Araghchi’s inconsistent justifications failed to quell the backlash. His repeated references to the SNSC did little to calm MPs. And in Iranian politics, it is an unprecedented event. Tehran’s Hamid Rasaei posted on X, “Ambiguities remain despite Araghchi’s explanations. Therefore, the Foreign Ministry must publish the text of the agreement.” He added sarcastically, “We usually kept deals secret for fear of the enemies. But since the other party is Grossi – the Israeli spy – there’s no reason to hide this deal from the public.” His colleague, Kamran Ghazanfari, went further to threaten Araghchi, “either deny Grossi’s remarks and share the signed document with lawmakers, or get prepared for your impeachment. We are not treating our national interests flippantly.”
Keyhan newspaper openly called the Cairo deal “invalid” because it does not meet the requirements of the Iranian law. Rajanews compared the Cairo document with Lausanne’s nuclear deal, adding, “Back in 2015, the government of Hassan Rouhani and then FM [Mohammad Javad] Zarif refused to publish the relevant fact sheet. Only later, Iranians found out the fact sheet had imposed unprecedented restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program.”
As public scrutiny intensified, the Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Committee summoned Araghchi for a closed-door session. He described the three-hour meeting as “very good and constructive” but revealed no details. According to reports, “Araghchi provided the committee with the text of the memorandum” and “it was decided that cooperation with the IAEA remain only in the framework of the law and its implementation depends on non-happening of the Snapback.” That reassurance did little to assuage critics. Rasaei summed up the mood with a blunt X post, “The three-hour session finished. It’s the JCPOA all over again.”
On 14 September, the SNSC issued a statement indicating that its Nuclear Committee had ratified the Cairo agreement, adding “the committee is backed by the SNSC whose decisions are confirmed by Iran’s leader [Ali Khamenei].” Yet, the statement also stressed that should any hostile action be taken against the Islamic Republic and its nuclear facilities, including the reinstatement of the terminated resolutions of the UN Security Council, the implementation of the arrangements would be suspended. So far, 90 lawmakers have asked Majlis Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf to convene a session on the Cairo memorandum. Ghalibaf has yet to comply.
In a country still reeling from the JCPOA’s consequences, lawmakers are increasingly determined to block another unilateral, opaque agreement made without parliamentary oversight.
Russia, Iraq Ramp Up Contacts, With Focus on Military Cooperation
Sputnik – 16.09.2025
Russian Security Council Secretary Sergei Shoigu arrived in Baghdad on a working visit.
Contacts between Russia and Iraq are becoming increasingly intensive, with business, economic, transport, military and defense industry cooperation issues being discussed, Russian Security Council Secretary Sergei Shoigu said.
“Contacts are becoming more intense and multidirectional. This concerns business, economics, and transport, military and defense industry cooperation,” Shoigu said during a brief conversation with the deputy advisor to the prime minister of Iraq for national security in Baghdad.
Russian Security Council Secretary Sergei Shoigu touched down in Baghdad on a working visit, during which he will hold meetings with the highest political and military leadership of Iraq, the Russian Security Council said.
“During the upcoming meetings, it is expected to convey the Russian side’s intention to further strengthen and expand cooperation in the security sphere,” it said.
The council added that, besides the current aspects of Russian-Iraqi bilateral cooperation, regional issues will also be addressed during the talks in Baghdad.
The US State Department’s Growing Thoughtcrimes Obsession
By Adam Dick | Peace and Prosperity Blog | September 16, 2025
The Trump administration’s Department of State has been placing a high priority on denying the granting of visas to, and revoking visas from, people who have said things critical of the Israel government, including the Israel government’s war activities. That looks like it is an early step of a trend at the United States government department. In a new Fox News interview this week, Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced his desire that the State Department would make an addition to the list of thoughtcrimes for which visas may be denied and revoked.
Rubio stated:
We should not be giving visas to people who are gonna come to the United States and do things like celebrate the murder, the execution, the assassination of a political figure. We should not. And, if they’re already here, we should be revoking their visa.
The strange thing is that the United States government and its tied-at-the-hip Israel government have a longtime penchant for undertaking just such murders, executions, and assassinations. People’s approval of those killings, though, should not be expected to cause much of a stir at the State Department. Don’t hold your breath for expressed approval of the assassination (ordered by Trump in his first presidential term) of Iran General Qassim Suleimani, for example, to result in denials or revocations of visas. The same goes for expressed approval of recent killings by the Israel government of “political figures” in Lebanon, Iran, and Yemen.
Rubio suggested immediately after his comment regarding changes in visas policy that the thoughtcrimes punished could expand into a much longer list. “Why would we want to bring people into our country that are gonna engage in negative and destructive behavior?” he declared. “Negative and destructive behavior” sure is a broad category. How close to qualifying to be Rubio’s bestie will someone have to come to make the visa cut?
Russia, Iran, China & Allies Want to Ban Attacks on Nuclear Sites
By Svetlana Ekimenko – Sputnik – 16.09.2025
Iran, Russia, Belarus, China, Venezuela, and Nicaragua have submitted a draft resolution to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) calling for a ban on any attacks or threats against safeguarded nuclear sites.
The initiative of the six countries, titled Prohibition of all forms of attack and threats of attack against nuclear sites and facilities under IAEA safeguards, is meant to defend the integrity of the NPT, Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei stated on X, in a reference to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
The draft:
Stresses that all states have the right to peaceful nuclear energy and are entitled to guarantees against military threats;
*Reaffirms that no country should target another’s safeguarded nuclear facilities.
Baqaei urged the international community to act decisively, warning against the “normalization of lawlessness.”
ACMA Pressures Tech Giants to Maintain State-Backed Fact-Checking in Australia
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | September 16, 2025
Australia’s communications regulator is once again pushing for tighter control over online speech, using the language of “misinformation” as justification for expanding censorship.
In its latest report on the voluntary Australian Code of Practice on Disinformation and Misinformation, the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) criticizes major platforms for stepping away from state-aligned fact-checking programs and chastises others for refusing to sign up to the code at all.
The regulator insists that “support for independent fact-checking in Australia appears to be stalling” and warns of “the potential impact of pulling away from, or limiting support for, independent fact-checking by signatories in Australia.”
This complaint exposes the real agenda: keeping tech companies tethered to outside arbiters of truth rather than trusting users to decide for themselves.
ACMA singles out Google, noting: “In July 2025, it was reported that Google would not renew its partnership with the Australian Associated Press’s fact-checking team.”
Meta is also put on notice after adopting a more open model in the United States, moving away from contracted fact-checkers in favor of community-driven notes.
Even though no such shift has been formally announced in Australia, ACMA underlines that Meta admits “4 of its 2025 commitments are contingent on it engaging third-party fact-checking organizations to fact-check content on their services.”
The report further scolds companies that never joined the code, declaring:
“It is disappointing that several major platforms have not signed up to the code. By electing not to submit their systems and processes to the same scrutiny as signatories, these platforms are sending a strong message to Australians that they are not supporting a coordinated industry-led approach to combatting disinformation and misinformation.”
ACMA then issues a direct demand: “We call on major non-signatories to sign up to the code to provide greater transparency to Australians about what they are doing to address disinformation and misinformation.”
What the regulator portrays as “voluntary” is in reality a pressure campaign: comply with outside “fact-checking” oversight or be publicly shamed as irresponsible.
By holding up third-party fact-checkers as the only credible safeguard, ACMA is endorsing a censorship regime where a handful of organizations act as gatekeepers of truth.
Community-led models that allow citizens to challenge and contextualize claims are sidelined, while central authorities are favored.
To those paying attention, ACMA’s report reads like an attempt to lock platforms into a system that elevates government-aligned “fact-checkers” above open discussion.
Australians have a right to free expression without bureaucrats or their preferred partners deciding what information is fit to see.
The louder ACMA complains about companies moving away from fact-checking, the clearer it becomes that the real “harm” being prevented is not misinformation itself, but the risk of ordinary people making up their own minds.
Trump Shooter’s Ukraine Links: Why Are Prosecutors Staying Silent?
Sputnik – 15.09.2025
As the trial of Donald Trumps’ second would-be assassin begins on the anniversary of his attempt, here’s what we know.
Ukraine trace ignored?
Few seem to care about Ryan Routh’s Ukraine connections. Early in the conflict he tried to recruit soldiers from Afghanistan, Moldova and Taiwan to fight against Russia. But when he mentioned Ukraine in court, the judge silenced him.
“Prosecutors, in the end, only want to bring a case forward that gives them the believability and confidence that they can win,” Matthew Crosston, professor of national security at Bowie State University, tells Sputnik.
Trump’s Ukraine stance
Shortly before the attempted shooting, Trump pledged in an election debate to end the Ukraine conflict.
Those behind arming Ukraine opposed that, while Routh’s preparations including multiple burner phones suggest he may not have acted alone.
But “prosecutors did not find it productive or realistic to look more seriously into how Routh was radicalized or who facilitated his access to weapons or attempts at acquiring more weapons,” Crosston says.
They already have the suspect – so why bother?
Featured Video
10 Hard Facts About the Holocaust
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
How Taiwan Became an Issue
By Joseph Solis-Mullen | The Libertarian Institute | August 22, 2024
Given that official Washington seems increasingly determined to fight Beijing over Taiwan, concerned Americans are right to wonder: how did the question of Taiwan come to be of such purported importance to these global powers? … continue
Blog Roll
Recent Comments
Richard Jones on Bird Flu Outbreak 40 Miles Fro… loongtip on Bird Flu Outbreak 40 Miles Fro… loongtip on Scott Ritter says he was … loongtip on Eilat port faces worst crisis… loongtip on British minister dreams of kid… loongtip on Kiev awards major mining proje… loongtip on UK believes it can seize any t… loongtip on Pirates of the Caribbean loongtip on Australian festival boycotted… loongtip on Kiev seeks to ban Russian musi… seversonebcfb985d9 on Somaliland and the ‘Grea… John Edward Kendrick on Kidnapped By the Washington…
Aletho News- Bird Flu Outbreak 40 Miles From Wisconsin Lab Sparks Concern About Gain-of-Function Experiments
- The West vs. the Rest
- Figures behind massacre of starving Gazans now shaping US Gaza plan
- “Real men go to Tehran” — The Zion-Con fantasy of regime change in Iran
- Why are EU leaders suddenly being nice to Russia?
- South Korean court sentences former president Yoon to five years in prison over martial law bid
- France Escalates Warmongering by Expanding Intelligence Support for Ukraine
- Venezuela Has Right to Have Relations With China, Russia, Cuba, Iran – Acting President
- Attacks in the Black Sea aim to destabilize relations between Russia and the Turkic world
- US Sending Troops to Middle East Over Trump’s Threats Against Iran – Reports
- If Americans Knew
- How an Israeli Firm Spreads Lies and Chaos Around the World
- ADL ‘Helping’ Ted Cruz and Ben Shapiro ‘Take Down’ Tucker Carlson and Nick Fuentes, CEO Suggests
- Israel is Destroying Hope for the Future: Reproductive Violence in Gaza
- J Street is the new AIPAC in the Democratic Party
- The fate of Gaza’s disappeared remains unknown
- The U.S. has announced ‘Phase 2’ of the Gaza ceasefire. Here’s why it doesn’t matter for Palestinians.
- 30 tons of rubble for every resident of Gaza – Not a ceasefire Day 98
- ‘My leg went to heaven before me’: Israeli war extinguishes Gaza childhoods
- Founders of deadly GHF ‘shaping’ new US-backed administration for Gaza: Report
- Genocide isn’t a mistake. Which is why the media can’t tell you the truth about Gaza
- No Tricks Zone
- Philosopher Schopenhauer: Climate Science Certainty Stems From Stupidity, Ignorance
- New Study: Species Extinction Rates Declining Since 1980 – ‘Climate Change Is Not An Important Threat’
- Denmark Places Climate Protection Above Animal Welfare, Poisoning And Culling Cows
- New Study: Greenland Was 3-7°C Warmer And Far Less Glaciated Than Today 6000-8000 Years Ago
- German Media Report That Current Frigid Weather Can Be Explained By Arctic Warming!
- Berlin Blackout Shows Germany’s $5 Trillion Green Scheme Is “Left-Green Ideological Pipe Dream”
- Modeling Error In Estimating How Clouds Affect Climate Is 8700% Larger Than Alleged CO2 Forcing
- Berlin’s Terror-Blackout Enters 4th Day As Tens Of Thousands Suffer In Cold Without Heat!
- Expect Soon Another PIK Paper Claiming Warming Leads To Cold Snaps Over Europe
- New Study: Human CO2 Emissions Responsible For 1.57% Of Global Temperature Change Since 1750
Aletho News 