Israel lobby offers another candidate $20m to run against Rashida Tlaib in Michigan
MEMO | November 28, 2023
Nasser Beydoun revealed on social media that he had been contacted by the Israeli lobby group AIPAC and offered $20 million to run against Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib in Michigan. Beydoun is the second candidate who has been offered funds to run against Tlaib, with Senate candidate Hill Harper speaking of a similar offer last week.
Taking to X, Beydoun wrote: “Even knowing where I stand on AIPAC’s influence on our elections and foreign policy, the pro-Israel lobby had the nerve to suggest that I would even consider taking a dime from them.”
Adding that he had been asked to “run against my friend Rashida Tlaib.”
“The pro-Israel lobby will go to any length to remove anybody from the US Congress that has any opposition to their agenda and their total unequivocal support for Israel, good, bad, or indifferent.”
Tlaib, who represents Michigan’s 12th District in Congress, is the only Palestinian-American in the US House of Representatives. She is known for her criticism of Israel’s occupation and its invasion of Gaza.
Earlier this month, the House of Representatives voted to censure Tlaib for some statements that angered the Zionist lobby and the right-wing movement in the US, such as the use of the slogan “From the river to the sea.”
Politico first reported on 22 November that a Michigan businessman had offered Harper $20 million in campaign money if he stood against Tlaib in next year’s Democratic primary race, identifying Linden Nelson as the figure.
Trudeau Supports Partnership With EU For Digital ID Push, Suggests it Will Help Curb Online “Disinformation”
By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | November 28, 2023
Canadian Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, a proponent of centralized control, has finalized a controversial collaborative digital partnership with the European Union. This agreement exhibits full commitment to the introduction of a digital identity system in Canada and the government is pursuing it, in part, under the guise of fighting online “disinformation.”
The Trudeau government’s announcement delineates the terms of the Canada-EU Digital Partnership, which aims not only to institute digital credentials for Canadians but also to bolster cooperation in the field of artificial intelligence (AI).
The contentious partnership insists on a joint effort from Canada and the EU to bolster their respective bilateral and multilateral cooperation in forums like the G7 and the G20.
“The Digital Partnership will allow Canada and the EU to have a stronger common voice in multilateral fora, where appropriate, and bring jointly developed solutions to international partners and advance our joint strategic priorities,” the announcement states.
The G20, an influential conglomerate of the globe’s 19 major countries and the EU, has previously encouraged exploring the creation of “digital public infrastructure,” including potential digital identification systems and perhaps even a centralized digital currency.
This “digital public infrastructure” phrase is the same buzzword being used by the likes of The Gates Foundation and the UN, when it comes to pushing digital ID and payment systems.
Alarmingly for many Canadians that support the protection of civil liberties, Trudeau has demonstrated a seemingly unwavering allegiance to this digital ID agenda.
Separate Tech and State
By Ron Paul | November 27, 2023
Some libertarians dismiss concerns over social media companies’ suppression of news and opinions that contradict select agendas by pointing out that these platforms are private companies, not part of the government. There are two problems with this argument. First, there is nothing unlibertarian about criticizing private businesses or using peaceful and voluntary means, such as boycotts, to persuade businesses to change their practices.
The second and most significant reason the “they are private companies” argument does not hold water is the tech companies’ censorship has often been done at the “request” of government officials. The extent of government involvement with online censorship was revealed in emails between government and employees of various tech companies. In these emails the government officials addressed employees of these “private companies” as though these employees were the government officials’ subordinates.
Government officials using their authority to silence American citizens is a blatant violation of the First Amendment. Yet some conservative elected officials and writers think the solution to the problem of big tech censorship is giving government more power over technology companies. These pro-regulation conservatives ignore the fact that it would be just as unconstitutional if a conservative administration was telling tech companies who they must allow to access their platforms as it is when progressives order social media companies to deplatform certain individuals. Furthermore, since the average government official’s political views are closer to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez than to Marjorie Taylor Greene, giving government more power over social media companies is likely to lead to more online censorship of conservatives.
Instead of giving government more power over social media, defenders of free speech should work to separate tech and state. An excellent place to start is pushing for passage of the Free Speech Protection Act. Unlike other legislation, such as the PATRIOT Act and the Affordable Care Act, this bill is accurately named. Introduced by Kentucky Senator Rand Paul and Ohio Representative Jim Jordan, this bill makes it a crime for any federal employee or employee of a federal contractor to use his position to communicate with a social media company to interfere with any American’s exercise of First Amendment protected rights. Violators of this law would face fines of at least 10,000 dollars as well as suspension, demotion, or even termination and a lifetime ban from working with the federal government.
In addition to working to pass the Free Speech Protection Act, those who object to the big technology companies’ “content moderation” policies should abandon big tech for more free speech friendly platforms. Many of the newer social media companies were started to meet the demand for a “content moderation”-free alternative to the dominant companies. Senator Paul himself stopped posting videos on YouTube because of its suppression of free speech. While my Liberty Report still airs on YouTube, its main platform is Rumble. It is wonderful to do a show on any topic I choose without worrying about being canceled.
Big tech censorship is a problem created by big government. The solution lies not with giving government more power but with separating tech and state. Passing the Free Speech Protection Act and making big tech pay a price for cooperating with big government by leaving to use sites like Rumble are two excellent places to start.
White House funding massive phone surveillance program
Press TV – November 27, 2023
US Senator Ron Wyden has expressed “serious concerns about the legality” of a secretive phone surveillance program funded by the White House to track trillions of domestic phone records every year across the United States.
According to a letter sent by Wyden to the Department of Justice (DOJ) on Sunday, the DAS (Data Analytical Services) program has been collecting information from countless phone calls nationwide.
The mass surveillance program, formerly called Hemisphere, allows officials to simply ask for phone records of not only criminal suspects, but of their spouses, children, parents, and friends.
In the letter, obtained by tech news site Wired, Wyden warned that “troubling information” he had received “would justifiably outrage many Americans and other members of Congress.”
“While I have long defended the government’s need to protect classified sources and methods, this surveillance program is not classified and its existence has already been acknowledged by the DOJ in federal court.”
Hemisphere was first exposed in a New York Times report in 2013. At the time, it was understood that the program was used solely for drug-related investigations.
Four billion new records are being added to its database every day, according Wired.
Wyden’s letter also indicates the program is being used by law enforcement agencies across the country — from local police and sheriff’s departments, all the way up to federal agencies — for any of their investigations.
Germans are assaulted, murdered, and raped in huge numbers by migrants, according to federal crime data
BY JOHN CODY | REMIX NEWS | NOVEMBER 27, 2023
Last year, 47,923 Germans were victims of violent immigrants, according to statistics from the German federal government, with one top police union official describing the data as “frightening.”
This data comes directly from the Federal Criminal Police Office’s (BKA) situation report on serious crimes committed by foreigners who came to the country as refugees and asylum seekers. The troubling figures from the BKA show an 18 percent increase from the previous year. Although foreigners make up a far smaller share of the overall population, around 13 percent, they are committing a tremendous amount of crime against German citizens.
On the other side, 12,061 foreigners were victims of a suspect with German citizenship.
However, it is important to note that Germans in the crime statistics are not exactly ethnic Germans. Everyone with German citizenship, including, for example, ethnic Turks or ethnic Moroccans, is considered German in statistics. So, it is unclear how many of these foreigners were attacked or raped by ethnic Germans and how many were attacked or raped by foreigners who received German citizenship or are the children of first- or second-generation immigrants.
Based on the current data, Germans are four times more likely to be attacked by an immigrant than vice versa.
All of these violent crimes are classified by the BKA as rape, assault, murder, and robbery. When the 47,923 German victims are broken down into specific categories, the data shows that 258 Germans fell victim to murder, attempted murder or manslaughter committed by immigrants, with 38 of these victims dying, while the others survived the attacks. On the other side, 89 immigrants were victims of crimes that involved at least one German perpetrator, with five of them losing their lives.
Those most willing to attack Germans are those whose asylum applications were rejected, along with immigrants from North African countries like Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia. While this group makes up only 0.8 percent of migrants, they account for 8.5 percent of all asylum seekers suspected of committing a violent crime.
The chairman of the Federal Police Union, Heiko Teggatz, said the crime data showing the rate of violent crime committed by migrants is “frightening.”
“What many have always suspected has now been proven. There is no more room for whitewashing. The federal and state governments must now act consistently and exhaust all possibilities to deport such criminals,” he said.
Under a new law that would dramatically increase foreigners receiving German citizenship, the country’s crime statistics are expected to become skewed. In fact, many of these foreigners would then be classified as “Germans” in the crime statistics, and if they were to assault a foreigner or another German, they would be listed as a “German” suspect.
Europe worries about the rise of “populism”, but real specter haunting EU is “maidanization”
By Uriel Araujo | November 27, 2023
In the Netherlands, the PVV (Freedom Party), led by controversial politician Geert Wilders, often described as “far-right” and “populist”, won about 37 of the 150 seats in the Dutch parliament. While talks have started to form the new government, Wilders and his party are now in a leading position. Predictably, much is being written now about the rise of “populism” in Europe, while Western discourses try to link it to far-right Nazi-Fascism.
Whether one likes the “populist” wave or not, this being an umbrella term for a variety of movements, it would be simply inaccurate to equate all such groups with Fascism in general. The supposed connection to Russia in turn only appears “sinister”, thanks to a wave of Russophobia, if one suffers from memory loss: as recently as 2021, the (now gone) Nord Stream 2 German-Russian pipelines project was being completed to deliver Russian gas directly to Western Europe. It had been opposed from the very start by Washington, while Berlin resisted American pressures all the way to almost completion – and then pipelines got blown up in a sabotage explosion, just as US President Joe Biden himself on February 7 had promised would happen, when he said: “If Russia invades (…) there will be no longer a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it.”
According to Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh, the sabotage was indeed carried out by Washington. However, thus far, the only voices that vehemently demand an active investigation about such an act of terrorism come from the populist camp, such as the Die Linke and the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) political parties in Germany. It is no wonder then that populism is on the rise in the continent.
Notwithstanding any valid criticism one may have of the current Russian military campaign in Ukraine, the roots of today’s conflict lie on this energy angle and American interests – as much as they also lie on US geopolitical goals pertaining to “encircling” Russia and to NATO’s enlargement for the sake of maintaining unipolarity.
This month Moldova, a country which is trying to join the European Union (EU), banned a “pro-Russian” party (the Chance Party) from taking part in local elections, two days before the vote, on the basis of “national security” concerns. The measure is in line with the latest European trend, which can only be described as Neo-Mccarthyism: in France, Marine Le Pen, who vowed to pull Paris out of NATO’s military command last year, was questioned for four hours, on June, during what was described as a witch trial, and her Rassemblement National party was described as a “communication channel” for Russia by a report published by the French government.
The same month, Poland’s President Andrzej Duda signed a law allowing Warsaw to conduct political repression against the opposition, the justification being, of course, “to investigate Russian influence on Polish politics”. The commission created for that purpose can ban people from public office for a decade. Such measures, as I wrote, mirror post-Maidan Ukraine’s own anti-Russian initiatives pertaining to banning vaguely defined “pro-Russian” political parties (at least 11 thus far) and the opposition. The Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has also been advancing moves to outlaw (Russian) Orthodox communities, something which even the head of the Ukrainian Catholic Church, Archbishop Sviatoslav Shevchuk of Kyiv-Halych, has denounced.
France, particularly, had always boasted of being the land of demonstrations, but that has changed. Last month, the country’s Interior Ministry banned all pro-Palestinian rallies nation-wide. Violent clashes between police and defiant protesters ensued, and organizing such demonstrations can now lead to arrest. Similarly, protests have also been banned or restricted in Germany, the United Kingdom, Switzerland, Hungary, Poland, and Austria, among other European nations. Esther Major, Amnesty International’s Deputy Director for Research in Europe voiced the organization’s concern, stating, on October 20, that “in many European countries, the authorities are unlawfully restricting the right to protest (…) In some cases, protests have been banned altogether.”
According to Julia Hall, Amnesty International’s expert on counter-terrorism and human rights (in Europe), “what people can say and do is narrowing by the day”, with France proposing to “criminalize people who criticize Israel”, which is “something new”. She adds that “free speech in Europe has been narrowed in record time. It is leaving victims without any voices. I do not think this will be a one-off.” The United Nations (UN) rapporteur Clement Voule has also voiced his concern about such “disproportionate and arbitrary” blanket bans on protests and the like setting “a very worrying precedent that could have a great impact on the exercise of our fundamental rights and freedoms” because in times of crisis people should have “space to raise their voices, grievances and solidarity, and calls for peace, justice and security.”
All such measures clearly violate human rights in Europe in Europe’s own terms, in accordance with article 11 of the European convention on human rights, by stigmatizing minorities such as Muslims and others, and by violating the freedom of peaceful assembly and the freedom of expression. The thing is this trend has not started now with the issue of Palestine at all: in fact, this year Germany banned Russian and Soviet flags during its “World War II commemorations” on Victory Day, this being the very day when the Soviet Union defeated Nazi Germany.
While European Establishment voices may try to demonize populism, we are witnessing in fact the “Maidanization” of the continent, with rising anti-Russian neo-McCarthyism, talks about banning political parties and demonstrations, the Western mainstreamization of the far-right and even Nazism (as long as it is not “pro-Russian”) plus Europe agreeing with Kyiv on “no Russian minority” in Ukraine. Rather than expecting Ukraine to adapt to European norms and values, it would seem Europe is changing in such a way that post-Maidan Ukraine will just feel at home if its accession ever materializes.
Free Speech Groups Call on Congress To Block NewsGuard Funding
By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | November 26, 2023
As many as 36 groups advocating free speech, the Free Speech Alliance, have turned to US Congress with a request to stop any further funding of NewsGuard.
NewsGuard is an outfit that describes itself as countering “misinformation on behalf of news consumers, brands and democracies.”
That “mission” also includes (trust) rating system for news sites – right in people’s browsers.
But members of the Free Speech Alliance, and those supporting it are not buying this pitch, summing up and denouncing NewsGuard instead as an ideologically-motivated “internet traffic cop.”
And they are warning that taxpayer money should never have been spent on financing it, and its ilk – and even less so, that the US authorities should continue to spend taxpayer money on what is described as politically motivated censorship of speech.
And these free speech groups want Congress to make sure the Biden White House is prevented from bankrolling such an organization – a particularly sensitive issue given the stage of the election cycle in the country – via the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).
In a letter this week, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker Mike Johnson are urged to make sure Congressman Richard McCormick’s free speech amendment to the NDAA sticks.
We obtained a copy of the letter for you here.
It seeks to ensure that the Department of Defense (DoD) is prevented from handing out contracts to NewsGuard and others, such as another highly controversial group, the Global Disinformation Index (GDI).
The complaint against them is that they show obvious and damaging ideological and political bias against the media in the right-oriented space.
The letter comes in the context of the news that NewsGuard and GDI thus far received money from the DoD, and the Department of State, respectively (NewsGuard to the tune of $750,000 from the DoD).
“As shown by two MRC (Media Research Center, one of the letter’s signatories) Free Speech America studies, NewsGuard’s ratings are heavily skewed in favor of leftist media and consistently target right-leaning outlets with scathingly low ratings,” it is stated by NewBusters.
As for GDI, its track record includes blacklisting the New York Post, The Daily Wire, Real Clear Politics and The Federalist.
The key point of the letter is that in case a (private, or NGO) organization is suspected of having political bias – well, that’s unconstitutional for a US government to support financially.
And a very pertinent point is made in the letter, regarding the “outsourcing of censorship.” Namely:
“That which government is constitutionally prohibited from doing, it cannot contract with others to do. Please ensure that Section 1532 is preserved in the final version of the NDAA.”
Toronto police arrest Palestine activists, should target Heather Reisman
Heather Reisman & Gerald Schwartz greeting IDF Forces
By Yves Engler | November 25, 2023
Aggressive pre-dawn police raids on homes and charging individuals with hate crimes for posting social justice messages is legal overreach at best and “thought crimes” reflecting creeping fascism at worst.
Truth is Heather Reisman, not those putting up posters, is the one who should have been charged with breaking Canadian law.
Between 4:30 and 6 am Wednesday Toronto police raided the residences of seven individuals alleged to have been involved in putting posters and fake blood on an Indigo bookstore on November 10. According to a summary of the police operation posted by World Beyond War, eight or more officers participated in each raid. Police knocked and quickly burst through doors, often without properly identifying themselves. All residents in the houses were handcuffed, including some elderly family members and parents in view of their children. Doors were broken and the police confiscated laptops and cellphones, including some provided by employers. Some of those charged were kept handcuffed in the back of police cars for hours.
This large, coordinated, police operation was a response to political messages put on an Indigo storefront downtown. The posters were photos of the book store’s high-profile CEO Heather Reisman with the statement “Funding Genocide”. Store staff removed the posters and fake blood with little difficulty.
The political stunt was a response to Reisman and her billionaire husband donating around $100 million to a charity they established to assist non-Israelis join that country’s military. Those promoting Israel’s genocide in Gaza panicked. Friends of Simon Wiesenthal Center CEO Michael Leavitt posted: “An absolutely appalling antisemitic attack in downtown Toronto, targeting Chapters Indigo and Jewish CEO Heather Reisman.” While the media largely echoed Leavitt’s perspective, a few outlets at least offered context on why Reisman was targeted.
In 2005 Reisman and her husband established the HESEG Foundation for Lone Soldiers “to recognize and honor the contribution of Lone Soldiers to Israel.” Heseg Foundation provides scholarships and other forms of support to Torontonians, New Yorkers and other non-Israelis (Lone Soldiers) who join the IDF. For the IDF high command — the Heseg board has included a handful of top military officials — “lone soldiers” are of value beyond their military capacities. Foreigners volunteering to fight for Israel are a powerful symbol to pressure/reassure Israelis weary of their country’s violent behaviour. At the first Heseg Foundation Grants Awards Ceremony in 2005 Israeli Defence Minister Shaul Mofaz said that “Encouraging and supporting young individuals from abroad” to become lone soldiers “directly supports the morale of the IDF”.
After the IDF killed 1,400 Palestinians in Gaza during operation Cast Lead in 2009 Heseg delivered $160,000 in gifts to IDF soldiers who took part in the violence.
More recently, Heseg has funded scholarships for members of the Duvdevan, an undercover commando unit known for disguising itself and blending in with Palestinians in the Occupied Territories to carry out operations. The Duvdevan scholarships are partly based on “excellence during army service”, which likely means kidnapping or killing Palestinians.
HESEG’s operations almost certainly violate Canada Revenue Agency rules for registered charities. CRA rules state that “increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of Canada’s armed forces is charitable, but supporting the armed forces of another country is not.”
Despite CRA rules, Reisman and Schwartz have received tens of millions of dollars in tax credits for donations to their charity. This abuse of the public purse is far more dubious than placing posters on a storefront to raise awareness of a wealthy individual’s assistance to a murderous foreign military.
While the social cost of taxpayers illegally subsidizing Reisman’s charity are much greater than anything people putting up posters did, at least Toronto police can rightfully claim that they don’t have jurisdiction over a matter the CRA is responsible for. But HESEG’s role in inducing Canadians to join the Israeli military may violate Canada’s Foreign Enlistment Act, which the Toronto police should enforce. According to the act, “any person who, within Canada, recruits or otherwise induces any person or body of persons to enlist or to accept any commission or engagement in the armed forces of any foreign state or other armed forces operating in that state is guilty of an offence.”
So, can we expect an upcoming early morning police raid on Heather Reisman’s Rosedale mansion handcuffing everyone, taking her personal devices and detaining her for inducing people to join a foreign military that has just killed 15,000 human beings in Gaza?
Only if Canada was indeed a state that upheld the rule of law, equally for all.
Microsoft’s ‘Democracy Forward’ Initiative Aims to Manipulate Our Society
Plans to To ‘Shape Information Ecosystem’, ‘Integrate Into Election Software’, ‘Provide Election Security’, and much more.
BY IGOR CHUDOV | NOVEMBER 24, 2023
Microsoft, founded in 1975 by Bill Gates, is a software firm that developed and owns monopoly rights to the famous Windows operating system.
My readers might be surprised to learn that Microsoft’s interests go far beyond the computer software market and involve inserting itself into every aspect of many civil societies’ decision-making. Its plans affect the most essential parts of our collective, democratic decision-making in ways that raise multiple questions.
Take a look at its “Democracy Forward” initiative.
Microsoft is actively doing the following (direct quotes below):
- Deeply involves itself with elections in various countries, emphasizing what it calls “election integrity”.
- Provides software called ElectionGuard to be integrated with all election software systems to be used along with vote counting.
- Preserves and supports journalism (that aligns with Microsoft’s goals) and helps with pre-publication review (!).
- Helps local publications create business models for sustainable journalism, thus sponsoring journalism.
- Partners with NewsGuard, a “trust” service ranking news sources based on highly biased fact-checks.
All of the above efforts are highly partisan and quite peculiar.
Microsoft aims to control discourse and elections in many ways, allowing it to steer our decision-making process to benefit Microsoft or its leadership. Let’s consider their activities a bit more closely:
Microsoft aims to “support trustworthy news sources,” leaving the selection of outfits to be supported mainly to itself.
Working directly in five communities across the country, Microsoft, in partnership with community foundations and other organizations, is providing new tools, technology, and capacity to explore hybrid business models for sustainable journalism to journalists and newsrooms.
I am sure that newsrooms and journalists, generously supported by Microsoft, will gladly provide Microsoft-friendly sustainable journalism.
Microsoft also wants to vet content provenance to filter the content journalists would report. As it proudly explains further, it works on filtering all content, using AI to decide what is or is not trustworthy and, therefore, should not be reported on:
Some 93% of these campaigns included the creation of original content, 86% amplified pre-existing content and 74% distorted objectively verifiable facts. Recent reports also show that disinformation has been distributed about the COVID-19 pandemic, leading to deaths and hospitalizations of people seeking supposed cures that are actually dangerous.
Our readers are very familiar with Covid-19 fact-checking and news-vetting, which never allowed even a bit of criticism of Covid vaccines.
Microsoft is intent on embedding itself into the election process. Many webpages linked by the “Democracy Forward” initiative describe multi-pronged efforts to “help manage elections”.
First of all, Microsoft wants to be in the vote-counting and vote-ascertainment business:
ElectionGuard is a free open-source software developer toolkit (SDK) that, when integrated into a voting system, provides voters and the public with reassurance that votes were counted accurately.
Microsoft hopes that ElectionGuard will be part of every electronic voting system. It wants to track votes.
Microsoft’s plans for election involvement are massive. It also wants to manage cyber security of every election:
Today, we are announcing several steps our Defending Democracy program is taking to help our democratic processes become more resilient in light of all these threats. First, starting today, we’re expanding our Defending Democracy Program to include a new service, Election Security Advisors, which will give political campaigns and election officials hands-on help securing their systems and recovering from cyberattacks.
Microsoft also wants to host election officials, giving it unprecedented access to the daily activities of elections offices:
Second, we are expanding our AccountGuard threat notification service to cover the offices of U.S. election officials and the U.S. Congress as many are working remotely.
Microsoft also wants to host all campaigns, like the Kennedy for President campaign. (I hope RFK sees through this and hosts elsewhere)
Third, we are extending Microsoft 365 for Campaigns to state-level campaigns and parties. And, finally, we are publishing our public policy recommendations for securing elections, including ways to secure them while confronting the COVID-19 public health crisis.
It is very nice how Microsoft wants to manage both cyber security as well as vote counting. Is that a safe idea, though? Shouldn’t these functions be separated?
Microsoft sponsors and supports NewsGuard.
NewsGuard, an expansive initiative to vet news sources and dismiss “untrustworthy” news media, claims to be non-partisan but, in reality, is anything but. As this article explains, it bases its decisions on fact-checks by highly partisan fact-checkers.
NewsGuard, not surprisingly, has always been deferential to all interests of Microsoft’s founder, Bill Gates, such as climate change, vaccines, and so on.
We have a commercial, public company (Microsoft) that is in the business of selling software and business cloud services.
For some reason, that firm is showing strange interest in inserting itself into the most intimate parts of the democratic process. It seeks to subvert decision-making procedures that our democracies rely on, such as the selection of news outlets to be trusted, vetting of news stories, and sponsorships of journalists.
Microsoft wants to both manage election security as well as be involved in vote counting. This creates unique risks and concerns that we need to understand better.
I do not believe that in a good democratic system, we can allow one big company to be so deeply embedded in the fabric of our social process, essentially allowing it to control our news sources, our thinking, security of elections, and vote counting.
Israel lobby’s war on students won’t end pro-Palestine activism
By Yves Engler | November 24, 2023
The Israel lobby’s contempt for student democracy is striking. In their bid to defend apartheid and genocide they are willing to sue, fabricate, blackmail and more.
Recently, McGill students voted for the Policy Against Genocide in Palestine. In the largest referendum turnout in Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) history, 78.7% of undergraduates called on the university administration to denounce Israel’s “genocidal bombing campaign” against Gaza. The resolution also called on McGill to sever ties with “any corporations, institutions or individuals complicit in genocide, settler-colonialism, apartheid, or ethnic cleansing against Palestinians.”
Before the election was completed the genocide lobby had already demanded the student’s vote be ignored. Simultaneously, they pressed McGill’s administration to condemn the resolution and demand SSMU jettison the results. If the student society ratified the results, the administration announced that it would terminate its Memorandum of Agreement with SSMU, which regulates fees, use of name and other matters between the university and student union.
The day after the voting results were announced, but before SSMU had a chance to ratify the resolution, B’nai B’rith brought a legal case to the Quebec Superior Court against it. An unnamed student claimed the resolution was discriminatory and the judge agreed to consider the case. As such, SSMU is restricted from ratifying or implementing the policy until after March 24 when the court will adjudicate the matter. Backed by a well-resourced outside organization, a single individual has been allowed to suppress the overwhelming will of students.
The Israel lobby followed a similar playbook 18 months ago when 71% of McGill undergraduates supported a Palestine Solidarity Policy, which called for boycotting “corporations and institutions complicit in settler-colonial apartheid against Palestinians.”
Before students voted on the Palestine Solidarity Policy Israel activists sought an injunction from SSMU’s Judicial Board to block the vote. After the policy was supported the administration, under Zionist lobby group pressure, threatened to terminate its Memorandum of Agreement with SSMU. This led SSMU’s unelected judicial board to reject the constitutionality of the Palestine Solidarity Policy.
Not satisfied with their undemocratic victory, B’nai Brith backed a lawsuit against SSMU, Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights (SPHR) and McGill’s administration. The Jewish advocacy organization sponsored Jonathan Fried’s bid to have the provincial court block McGill students from being able to collectively take action in support of Palestinian rights. A New York transplant, Fried sought to have Québec’s Superior Court prevent McGill students from exercising their democratic rights in the hopes it would protect a violent, colonial, system in the Middle East.
When the Palestine Solidarity policy passed in March 2022 its opponents highlighted the fact that only 17% of eligible voters cast ballots. But participation more than doubled in the recent referendum — with the proportion of students supporting Palestine increasing — yet the suppression continues.
What’s taking place at McGill’s is egregious but Israel lobby groups have pursued similar policies at other universities. They’ve recently launched lawsuits against Concordia, Queen’s, Toronto Metropolitan, University of British Columbia and York for purported “antisemitism”. They’ve also pushed university administrators to condemn student groups and succeeded in having them reprimand or dismiss medical and nursing students as well as university chaplains and sexual assault centre staff for opposing genocide. At the University of British Columbia, the Jewish Zionist group Hillel was recently caught creating falsely attributed stickers in a bid to discredit the Social Justice Centre opposition to genocide.
An important part of the apartheid lobby’s power within universities is that administrations are obsessed with fundraising and Jewish Zionists donate large sums. Israel lobby activists constantly raise the specter of withdrawing funds from universities that don’t clampdown on students. On November 10 Liberal MP Anthony Hausefather “encouraged donors to contact” Concordia’s administration to pressure them to suppress Palestine solidarity. Ten days earlier he “demanded that university administrators crack down on antisemitism on campus or lose funding.”
Suing, seeking to intimidate students and labeling opposition to genocide “antisemitism” is a tacit admission that you can’t make the case for Israel. Unable to win the argument, the apartheid lobby increasingly relies on smears and legal action. But anti-democratic maneuvers can only stunt Palestine solidarity for so long. It can’t hide the fact that Israel has lost control of the narrative with the younger generation.
Facebook greenlit ads inciting violence against Palestinians
The Cradle | November 24, 2023
The Intercept revealed on 21 November that Facebook has allowed incendiary advertisements that promote violence against Palestinians to appear on its platform; more specifically, several ads calling for a “Holocaust for the Palestinians.”
Even though such derogatory phrases are a direct violation of Facebook’s policies, ads containing phrases such as “wiping out Gazan women and children” were able to pass through moderation filters.
Nadim Nashif, the founder of 7amleh, a Palestinian organization specializing in social media research and advocacy, remarked that green lighting of these advertisements represents yet another misstep by Meta in its dealings with Palestinians, adding that “throughout the crisis, we have seen a continued pattern of Meta’s clear bias and discrimination against Palestinians.”
Advertisements in Hebrew and Arabic, breaching Facebook and Meta’s guidelines, were submitted. Some of these ads overtly promoted violence, explicitly urging the killing of Palestinian civilians.
The initiative to scrutinize Facebook’s automated content moderation system arose after Nashif noticed an advertisement on Facebook blatantly advocating for the assassination of Palestinian rights advocate Paul Larudee.
This promoted content bypassed Facebook’s automated systems to filter out dangerous material. Even though the advertisement was eventually taken down after a complaint was lodged, it raised serious concerns about how such explicit calls for murder, clearly against Facebook’s policies, managed to get approved for display on the platform.
The advertisement calling for the murder of the Palestinian rights advocate was sponsored by a far-right group known as Ad Kan, established by a former Israeli military official.
Over 90% of pro-Palestinian content deleted since Oct. 7 on social media following Israel’s request
The New Arab | November 22, 2023
Social networking sites, mostly Meta-owned, have deleted thousands of pro-Palestinian posts since the outbreak of Israel’s brutal war in Gaza, in response to Tel Aviv’s request to do so.
The Israeli Attorney General’s Office has sent approximately 9,500 requests since October 7 to Meta – which owns Facebook and Instagram – as well as the video-sharing app TikTok, to remove content related to Israel’s brutal war in Gaza, according to a recent report published by Forbes.
As a result, around 94 percent of that content has been deleted, digital researcher Mona Shttayeh said in an interview with Al Jazeera Mubasher, citing the report.
The number of requests to delete such content has increased since the report’s publication, she said.
Shtayyeh said that it is “impossible” to comprehend the magnitude of the large number of Israeli requests to restrict Palestinian content, adding that the number of demands has increased tenfold since Israel’s onslaught on the besieged strip, which has killed over 14,000 Palestinians began.
Last month, Instagram had deleted and later reinstated the Eye on Palestine account, which has been a source of on-the-ground images and videos in Gaza.
Prior to the war, pro-Palestinian content already experienced censorship, restrictions and shadow-banning. In 2021, Facebook was accused by activists for censoring Palestine-related posts on its platform on Israel’s military assault in Gaza and protests against forced expulsions of Sheikh Jarrah families in the same year. The social networking giant was then investigated, and found guilty of violating Palestinian human rights in documenting Israeli atrocities.
Last year, in 2022, prominent Palestinian-American model Bella Hadid said she was shadow-banned when attempting to post Palestinian content relating to the storming of the Al-Aqsa Mosque to the Instagram Stories feature.
Shttayeh also stressed that incitement and hate speech against Palestinians on social media also increased as Israel’s military campaign in Gaza began.
Meanwhile, pro-Palestinian censorship online could witness a significant increase following the Knesset’s approval of a draft law banning the consumption of terrorist publications earlier this month.
Digital advocacy group 7amleh told The New Arab in a press release that the bill could pave the way for “the preemptive criminalisation” of people who have neither committed nor planned any crime. The draft law could also increase the Israeli authorities’ surveillance of Arab Palestinian citizens while infringing on their rights to privacy, freedom of expression and the right to access information.
There have been several cases of Palestinian citizens of Israel being arrested for sharing pro-Palestinian content on social media, including singer Dalal Abu Amneh who wrote “there is no victor but God”, in support of Gaza.
Featured Video
Chinese jet fuel and the myth of energy independence
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
Book Review
Former Insiders Criticize Iran Policy as U.S. Hegemony
By GARETH PORTER | CounterPunch | February 27, 2013
“Going to Tehran” arguably represents the most important work on the subject of U.S.-Iran relations to be published thus far.
Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett tackle not only U.S. policy toward Iran but the broader context of Middle East policy with a systematic analytical perspective informed by personal experience, as well as very extensive documentation.
More importantly, however, their exposé required a degree of courage that may be unparalleled in the writing of former U.S. national security officials about issues on which they worked. They have chosen not just to criticise U.S. policy toward Iran but to analyse that policy as a problem of U.S. hegemony. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Why no power can undermine Iran’s eternal dominance over the Strait of Hormuz
- Is The War Against Iran Over?
- Iran war will leave long-term ‘scar’ on Wall Street, investors warn
- How Iran decimated US power projection in West Asia: Military lessons of 40-day war
- Iran’s report details US-Israeli war crimes in targeting schools, hospitals, livelihoods
- NATO’s Slow Fracture: How Trump’s Iran War Exposed the Instrument of Hegemony
- Chinese jet fuel and the myth of energy independence
- Ukraine Sea Drone Fired From Libya Hit Russian Tanker in Mediterranean
- IRGC: Iranian forces launched no attacks during ceasefire hours
- Trump Administration Moves To Automate U.S. Military Draft Registration
- If Americans Knew
- TCN: Is Israel Blackmailing President Trump?
- Israel killed at least 303 Lebanese yesterday – who were they? Daily Update
- Amnesty: Urgent – Protect Lebanese civilians from brutal escalation in Israeli attacks
- Is The War Against Iran Over?
- Inside the Israeli army’s propaganda wing
- Hundreds of Gaza Amputees Stranded in Legal Limbo
- The gallows law: Israel moves toward executing Palestinian children
- Tucker Carlson: The Path to Peace requires ending ‘special alliance’ with Israel
- This is ceasefire? Israel’s biggest massacre yet in Lebanon, another journalist killed in Gaza – Daily Update
- Tucker Carlson on Israel: This Is the Behavior of an Ally? Really?
- No Tricks Zone
- An Inconvenient Tree: Uncovered In Alps… Europe Much Warmer Than Today 6000 Years Ago
- New Study Reports A 60% Slowdown In Greenland’s Ice Loss Rate In The Last Decade
- Low Intensity Tornado Wrecks Major Solar Farm, Creating A Potential Toxic Dump
- New Study Finds Warming Saves Lives…Cold Temperatures 12 Times More Deadly Than Excess Heat
- German Science Blog Accuses PIK Climate Institute Of Hallucinating Climate Tipping Points
- Devastating Assessment Of Comirnaty Vaccine By Former Senior Pfizer Europe Toxicologist
- New Study: CO2 Is ‘Effectively Negligible’ As An Explanatory Climate Change Factor Since 2000
- Former Pfizer Toxicologist Dr. Helmut Sterz Tells Bundestag Hearing Pfizer Vaccine Should Have Never Been Approved
- Energy Expert: Germany’s Nuclear Phaseout Was A “500 Billion Euro Mistake”
- New Research: South Australia’s Mid-Holocene Sea Surface Temperatures Were 4°C Warmer Than Today
Aletho News 