The Palestine Chronicle case: When truth becomes the crime
By Mohamed El Mokhtar | MEMO | August 26, 2025
The Palestine Chronicle is not a militant organisation. It is a modest, independent publication, sustained by small donations and animated by a singular mission: to bear witness. It tells the untold stories of Palestine, documenting dispossession, resistance, and the endurance of a people condemned to silence. In a media landscape dominated by powerful conglomerates repeating the language of governments, the Chronicle insists on a journalism of proximity — grounded in daily lives, in the rubble of Gaza, in voices otherwise erased. Its true offense, in the eyes of its detractors, is not invention but truth.
At the heart of this endeavor stands Ramzy Baroud. His career is the antithesis of clandestine. For decades he has written, taught, and spoken in public, producing books translated into multiple languages, contributing columns to international publications, addressing audiences in universities and public forums across continents. He is not a shadowy figure; he is a man whose work has been consistent, transparent, and intellectually rigorous. His life is not untouched by the tragedy he describes: many members of his family were killed under Israeli bombardments. Yet while mainstream media rushed to amplify unproven allegations against him, they remained deaf to his personal grief. His tragedy was ignored, his integrity overlooked, his voice distorted — because his engagement is unbearable to those who would prefer silence.
A crime of conscience, not of law
He is an engaged journalist in the noblest sense: independent, lucid, unflinching. His so-called crime is not collusion with violence but fidelity to memory. That is why he is demonised — not for what he has done in law, but for what he represents in conscience. America, unable to silence Palestinian voices through censorship alone, now instrumentalises its justice system to achieve by indictment what it failed to achieve by argument. Having harassed universities, intimidated students, and punished professors for their solidarity with Gaza, it turns the courtroom into a new battlefield. And Congress, captive to the whims of its Zionist masters, joins the manhunt, targeting a journalist for the sole offense of telling the truth of his people. As for the mainstream press, it chooses cowardice: ignoring his family’s suffering, ignoring the emptiness of the charges, while echoing the accusations of power as if they were evidence.
Law twisted into a weapon
The complaint filed against Ramzy Baroud and the organization (People Media Project) that runs the Palestine Chronicle rests on the Alien Tort Statute, grotesquely overstretched to criminalise editorial decisions rather than acts of war. It alleges that by publishing articles from Abdallah Aljamal — described by Israel as a Hamas operative killed during a hostage rescue — the Chronicle “aided and abetted” terrorism. But here lies the first fissure: this characterisation of Aljamal comes exclusively from Israeli military sources, themselves a belligerent party. It has never been independently verified. The claim that he was both a journalist and a Hamas operative remains an allegation, not an established fact. To treat it as judicial evidence is to replace proof with propaganda.
Even if—hypothetically—Aljamal had, at the demand of a militant group, harbored hostages, such a circumstance would not in itself render him culpable: what ordinary civilian in a war zone can refuse the command of militants under threat of force? And even if it occurred, how could Ramzy Baroud have known of it? Even taken at face value, the allegation collapses upon scrutiny. No evidence demonstrates that the Chronicle or its editor had actual knowledge of Aljamal’s supposed operational role, nor that modest freelance payments — if any at all — bore any causal nexus to hostage-taking. The federal judge, in February 2025, dismissed the original complaint precisely for lack of proof of knowledge or intent. The plaintiffs returned with an amended filing, repackaged in rhetoric and pathos, but still devoid of the material elements required under international law: actus reus (a substantial contribution to the crime) and mens rea (intent or knowledge).
To equate the publication of articles with material support for terrorism is not jurisprudence but a juridical contortion. It is the substitution of law by politics, the criminalisation of journalism under the mask of counterterrorism. What is sought is not justice but intimidation — to cast suspicion on every Palestinian voice, to brand their words as weapons, their witness as crime.
Thus the legal emptiness is evident:
- Jurisdiction overstretched: the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) was never intended to criminalise editorial contracts.
- Elements unmet: no proven knowledge, no intent, no substantial assistance.
- Factual foundation unstable: the Hamas label rests on unverified allegations from one warring party.
- Political aim transparent: to silence Palestinians and punish one of their most articulate representatives for his independence.
This case is not justice. It is intimidation. It is not law. It is propaganda dressed in the robes of a courtroom. The allegation against Ramzy Baroud rests not on proof, but on the word of a belligerent army. An army that bombs, besieges, and kills — and then dictates who is journalist, who is terrorist, who is fit to speak. To transform those claims into evidence is to surrender law itself to war.
Ramzy Baroud is not a conspirator. He is a journalist of record, a man of books, a teacher, a witness. His own family has been buried under rubble. And yet, America has not mourned them, has not spoken of them. Instead, it chooses to hunt him — to turn his grief into accusation, his fidelity into crime.
Some congressmen have joined this manhunt, eager to please their Zionist patrons. Universities have been disciplined, their students silenced. The press, that great sentinel of truth, has abandoned him, repeating only the charges while ignoring his suffering. This is not democracy. It is servitude.
The elements of law are absent. There is no actus reus, no mens rea, no causal link. There is only suspicion. There is only the will to silence.
And so the true purpose stands naked: to criminalise the Palestinian word, to punish a journalist for speaking the truth of Gaza, to make an example of him so that others will be afraid to write.
But intimidation is not justice. A trial without evidence is not law. And silencing the witness will not erase the truth.
Law or servitude
Here one hears Thurgood Marshall’s axiom: “The Constitution does not permit the discrimination of silence.” One hears Cochran’s defiance: “If the proof is not there, the case cannot stand.” One hears Vergès exposing the colonial reflex that brands resistance as terror. One hears Vedel’s warning: that when law is bent to politics, law ceases to exist.
Ramzy Baroud stands here not accused, but accusing. He accuses a system that bends to power, a Congress that bows to lobbyists, a press that betrays its duty, and a nation that dares call itself free while shackling its own justice.
Therefore, the American justicial system has a choice: to lend its authority to propaganda, or to defend the very principle that sustains law — that guilt must be proven, not declared. To condemn Ramzy Baroud would be to condemn journalism itself. To acquit him is to restore some dignity to justice. The choice is clear.
Polish president vetoes bill extending aid for Ukrainians
RT | August 25, 2025
Polish President Karol Nawrocki vetoed a bill on Monday to prolong benefits for Ukrainian refugees, arguing the legislation needs a rework. The current system of payments is set to expire in September.
In announcing the decision, the president, who took office earlier this month, reiterated his stance that state benefits should only cover Ukrainians who work in Poland.
“We remain open to providing assistance to Ukrainian citizens – that hasn’t changed. But after three and a half years, our law should be amended,” Nawrocki said in a statement.
The vetoed bill would have extended current benefits for Ukrainians until March 2026. Poland has been one of the top destinations for Ukrainian refugees since the escalation of the conflict between Kiev and Moscow in February 2022. Around one million Ukrainians are believed to have settled in the country since then.
“President Nawrocki does not agree to the privileged treatment of citizens of other countries. That is why he has decided to veto the bill on assistance for Ukrainian citizens in its current form and will present his own legal proposals,” the presidential office stated.
The decision has prompted concerns it could ultimately have grave implications for Ukraine itself, given that funding for Ukraine’s access to Starlink satellite internet was in the same legislation.
“Presidential vetoes are slashing blindly! With his decision, Karol Nawrocki is cutting off Ukraine’s internet, since that is effectively what his veto of the law on assistance to Ukrainian citizens means,” Polish Digital Affairs Minister Krzystof Gawkowski wrote on X.
Nawrocki’s office told Reuters that the payments for Starlink could continue if parliament adopted a bill including the presidential proposals before the end of September.
Starlink is a key command and control element for the Ukrainian military, and has seen direct combat use, with satellite terminals routinely mounted on long-range aerial and naval drones.
France has ruined its reputation as a free country – Durov
RT | August 24, 2025
Telegram founder Pavel Durov has said that France ruined its reputation as a free country by briefly detaining him last year.
Durov was arrested at a Paris airport in August 2024 on charges of allowing criminals to use his messenger for illegal activities, including extremism and child abuse. The Russian-born tech entrepreneur was later released on €5 million ($5.86 million) bail and allowed to return to Dubai, where he resides.
In a post on Telegram on Sunday, Durov described his detention as “unprecedented” and “legally and logically absurd.” He said the investigation had produced no evidence of wrongdoing, stressing that Telegram’s moderation practices follow industry standards and that the company has complied with all legally binding requests from French authorities.
Durov also claimed that French investigators bypassed EU-mandated legal channels when sending queries to the platform, a mistake he argued could have been avoided “simply by googling the process or asking.”
“Sadly, the only outcome of my arrest so far has been massive damage to France’s image as a free country,” Durov said, adding that he must still return to Paris every two weeks with no appeal date in sight.
Telegram has since updated its privacy policy to allow the collection of metadata, including IP addresses, device information, and username changes, for up to one year, with the option of handing it over to “relevant judicial authorities.”
Last month, Durov accused France of waging “a crusade” against free speech, claiming that intelligence officials had tried to pressure him into censoring conservative content during Romania’s 2024 presidential election. The French intelligence agency, the DGSE, later said it had merely “reminded” him of the responsibility to police content while denying election interference.
Tulsi Gabbard Shuts Down Foreign Malign Influence Center, Citing Political Censorship
By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | August 22, 2025
The Foreign Malign Influence Center (FMIC), a government office created during the Biden administration under the pretense of countering foreign disinformation, has been officially shut down as part of a broad overhaul of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) led by Director Tulsi Gabbard.
The move is being described by the administration as an effort to dismantle wasteful, politicized, and unconstitutional programs that have operated well beyond the intended scope of US intelligence work.
A fact sheet released by ODNI reveals that FMIC, along with its earlier incarnations, served as a tool for suppressing domestic political speech, particularly viewpoints at odds with the previous administration.
“FMIC and its predecessor entities were used by the previous administration to justify the suppression of free speech and to censor political opposition,” the document states.
Furthermore, it details the existence of a sustained partnership between the center and major technology companies, including X, Facebook, and Google, which ODNI says lacked any objective or scientific grounding and may have been weaponized against Americans.
This coordination, according to ODNI, took place under the guise of countering foreign influence but functioned in practice as a mechanism to police and control public discourse online.
The fact sheet highlights a specific incident from October 2020, when FMIC, then operating as the Election Threats Executive, was involved in shaping how social media platforms responded to the New York Post’s reporting on Hunter Biden’s laptop.
That reporting was rapidly suppressed across major platforms, an act that later drew widespread condemnation from free speech advocates. The ODNI document directly connects FMIC to that censorship effort, noting its coordination with platforms on their response to the story.
Gabbard, speaking with Fox News host Jesse Watters, condemned the center’s activities in clear terms. “It was essentially used as a means to censor Americans’ free speech, calling it, ‘Hey, you’re spreading disinformation,’” she explained.
Gabbard further stated that FMIC worked directly with social media companies to silence dissent, particularly criticism of the Biden administration, which she described as “a direct contradiction and undermining of our fundamental constitutional rights.”
Although the ODNI fact sheet stops short of using the term “abolished,” it does confirm that FMIC’s functions are being dismantled and its personnel absorbed elsewhere.
The agency’s language states it is “refocusing functions within the Foreign Malign Influence Center” and integrating any necessary components into other divisions like Mission Integration and the National Intelligence Council. Nevertheless, in her interview, Gabbard was clear that the center’s days of operating as an independent entity are over.
Beyond FMIC, the Gabbard-led reforms are targeting a range of other ODNI entities accused of serving partisan purposes rather than advancing national security.
Among those being eliminated are the External Research Council and the Strategic Futures Group, both criticized for pushing politically motivated intelligence. According to the fact sheet, the overall restructuring, referred to as “ODNI 2.0,” will slash agency staffing by nearly half and save taxpayers over $700 million per year.
4chan Rejects UK Ofcom Fine, Citing US Free Speech Protections and Threatening Legal Action
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | August 22, 2025
4chan’s legal team has firmly rejected an attempt by UK regulator Ofcom to impose penalties under Britain’s new Online Safety Act, declaring the proposed fine unenforceable and a direct challenge to free expression protected by US law.
The media regulator wants the site to pay a £20,000 ($27,010.78) penalty, with additional daily fines if it continues to ignore requests tied to its ongoing investigation.
However, Preston Byrne, the attorney representing 4chan, argues that the demand lacks legal standing in the United States.
Speaking to the BBC, Byrne described the regulator’s actions as “an illegal campaign of harassment” directed at American tech firms.
Byrne made clear his client would not comply: “4chan has broken no laws in the United States, my client will not pay any penalty.”
Ofcom launched its investigation to determine whether the platform meets requirements laid out in the Online Safety Act, which compels digital services to shield UK-based users from “harmful” content.
In August, the regulator issued what it called a “provisional notice of contravention,” accusing 4chan of failing to respond to two formal data requests.
The site, long known for its loose moderation policies and anonymous posting, has been a regular target of controversy over the years. Its open nature allows for a broad range of user expression, which some governments now seek to restrict under the pretext of safety.
In a public statement released on X, legal representatives for 4chan doubled down.
Byrne & Storm, alongside Coleman Law, stated: “American businesses do not surrender their First Amendment rights because a foreign bureaucrat sends them an email.” They argued that US courts have consistently refused to enforce foreign censorship fines, and if necessary, they would escalate the matter in federal court to protect those constitutional rights.
The statement added that US authorities were already briefed on the situation, and it urged the Trump administration to “invoke all diplomatic and legal levers” in defense of US-based platforms against what it called “extraterritorial censorship mandates.”
Ofcom declined to provide further comment while the investigation remains open.
TikTok bars calling Israeli forces ‘terrorists’ after hiring ex-soldier
Press TV – August 24, 2025
TikTok updated its content guidelines to prohibit labeling Israeli forces as “terrorists,” shortly after appointing a former Israeli soldier and self-described “proud Zionist” to oversee its so-called “anti-Semitism” policies.
TikTok appointed Erica Mindel as its new Public Policy Manager for Hate Speech 15 days before the ban was announced, according to users on X.
They also pointed out that the guidelines previously prohibited “all racial supremacy” but have now been narrowed to exclusively address “White supremacy.”
According to her LinkedIn profile and job description, Mindel is tasked with shaping the company’s hate speech policy and serving as TikTok’s internal and external expert on anti-Semitism.
Mindal spent two and a half years in the Israeli military as a madrichot shirion – an instructor in the occupation army – and also worked with the US State Department.
“I am a proud American Jew,” she once said.
She was hired following pressure from the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), a notorious Zionist lobby group in the US. She is based in New York City and is reported to earn an estimated £280,000 annually.
Her two-and-a-half years as an Israeli military instructor, coupled with her work for US Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Antisemitism Deborah Lipstadt, suggest that her role is aimed at censoring pro-Palestinian content while amplifying Israeli narratives amid the ongoing genocidal war on Gaza.
The move comes as the Israeli regime persists in its systematic oppression of Palestinians by worsening the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.
Disturbing images and videos depicting emaciated children, relentless bombardments, and widespread destruction continue to surface on social media platforms, shedding light on the dire situation faced by Palestinians in the region.
Backed by the US, Israel launched its onslaught on Gaza on October 7, 2023, after Palestinian resistance fighters waged the surprise Operation Al-Aqsa Storm against the Zionist entity in response to the regime’s decades-long campaign of bloodletting and devastation against Palestinians.
The Israeli military has so far killed more than 62,600 Palestinians, mostly women and children.
Beware Universal Mental Health Screening
By Cooper Davis, Jeffrey Lacasse | Brownstone Institute | August 21, 2025
How would your child score on a common mental health screening?
A mental health professional might view the results and conclude that your child has a mental health problem… that needs to be psychiatrically diagnosed and treated, even medicated.
Will this help your child thrive? Or will it reshape their identity in undesirable ways? Will you be comfortable with your child taking medications that alter their developing brains and could perturb their sexuality? When your child reaches adulthood, will they be able to withdraw from these drugs, or will they despair to find out that their body and brain have adapted to them, making this difficult or maybe even impossible?
For any parent with even minor reservations about our current medical and mental health system, these aren’t theoretical questions. A new public policy has just made them very salient.
Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker has signed a new law mandating universal mental health screenings for every child in public school. This includes healthy children with no signs of behavioral problems. Parents can theoretically opt out, but they’ll have to do so repeatedly, as the screenings will be given at least once a year from grades 3-12.
Media coverage has been laudatory, expounding on the importance of “getting kids the help and support they deserve.” But do you know what a mental health screen is and how it works? Before sounding the applause, parents need to understand what these screenings are, how they’re used, and what the potential outcomes of their use might be.
The new law does not specify how children will be screened, what questionnaires will be used, or what procedures will be followed when a child’s answers are seen as troubling. But to get a sense of the ground that self-report mental health questionnaires cover, you can screen your kids right now with a commonly used questionnaire:
While this is a self-assessment, the questions are the same whether you’re a parent or teacher filling this out on behalf of a child. Each of the 35 questions can be answered “never,” “sometimes,” or “often.” The scoring is simple:
- 0 = “never”
- 1 = “sometimes”
- 2 = “often”
If the total score is at or above 28, professionals will consider it likely that your child has a mental health problem. The law doesn’t define what happens next. Ideally, there would be a lengthy (and costly) multi-hour clinical assessment for each such child that views these results skeptically, and heavily considers normal developmental issues and transitory problems. In the real-world mental health system, it’s hard to imagine that actually happening.
Unfortunately, the bias of the current system is towards overmedicalization, overdiagnosis, and overtreatment. The implementation of universal screening is likely to worsen these problems.
In the past, some physicians gave annual chest X-rays to smokers. This was a form of universal screening in response to concerns about lung cancer. At first blush, this sounds reasonable. The problem? False-positive results. Studies showed that annual X-rays did not prevent mortality. They did cause anxiety in patients. And incidental findings were common, causing unnecessary biopsies, procedures, and interventions.
Current screening guidelines now target high-risk individuals. This is an example where the medical establishment carefully weighed the risks and benefits of universal screening and concluded that it was not in the interests of patients, and with a well-defined disease in mind, lung cancer.
Mental health diagnosis is not like cancer. It is a fuzzy, subjective enterprise. We don’t have blood tests or brain scans; we have flawed checklists and clinical judgment. And obviously, being improperly identified as having a mental disorder comes with a real cost for the child.
Screening every single child makes it inevitable that some healthy children will be thrust into the mental health pipeline. Even assuming that the questionnaires work reasonably well, a 15% false-positive rate is likely. Combine this false-positive rate with twice-a-year universal screening from grades 3-12, and your child will have 20 separate chances to be wrongly identified as having a mental health problem…at which point the government ostensibly gets involved in the mental health of your child.
It’s easy to imagine the catastrophic results. A child’s mental health screen inaccurately identifies a mental health problem; the busy therapist confirms a diagnosis; there’s eventually a referral to a psychiatrist, who prescribes psychotropic medication. Out of 20 screenings, this only has to happen once to alter your child’s life forever.
I (C.D.) know, because it happened to me.
I was caught up in a similar diagnostic dragnet in 1991, when my teacher read about Ritalin in Time magazine and began “identifying” students she believed might have the condition, which at the time was known as “ADD” (the “H”, for hyperactivity, came later). My parents chose not to medicate me, but did send me to a psychologist and a pediatric psychiatrist. From them, I learned that my constant chair-tipping, foot-tapping, wiggling, and inability to tolerate boredom — the very traits that drove me to act out in class and leave little space between impulse and action — weren’t just part of me, but symptoms of a medical condition. It was presented as both permanently part of my nature and “acceptable,” yet somehow also extrinsic to me and framed primarily as a “deficit.” (At that time, ADD was not as widely viewed as a full disability as it is today.)
At 17, when I was legally able to decide for myself — though I now view the “informed” part as questionable — I chose to begin drug treatment. Even without the drugs, however, the diagnosis had already shaped my sense of self: diminishing my agency, reinforcing a feeling of abnormality, and feeding the belief that my more organized, conscientious, and inconspicuous peers possessed something essential that I never would. You can hear a fuller account in The Atlantic’s Scripts podcast series (“The Mandala Effect,” Episode 2, on YouTube).
My experience is just one example of how a single screening can lock a child into a lifelong diagnostic identity — and once that process starts, there are few real off-ramps. Surely no one in favor of this law wants that scenario to come true for any child.
But with 1.4 million schoolchildren in Illinois, we’re talking about dealing with the results of up to 28 million separate mental health screenings in the decade after implementation. Will the mental health professionals dealing with this deluge approach the medicalization of your child’s supposed problems carefully, gingerly, sensitively? A 2004 study found that screening 1,000 children for ADHD using the American Psychiatric Association’s DSM criteria would result in 370 false positives. And it’s common for children to be prescribed psychotropic medication at their first consultation with their physician or psychiatrist.
A comprehensive, in-depth psychological assessment for each child might help reduce false positives — but it would also mean spending 3-6 hours assessing each child, which represents a high burden in terms of both time and money. School districts in Illinois already report that a lack of time, expertise, and financial resources presents challenges to implementing universal mental health screening. The law passed anyway.
It’s hard to argue that attempts to identify and measure human misery, suffering, and emotional pain are a bad thing, etc.—especially when the goal is “getting people the help they need.” It sounds right. But the kids who will be screened every year in Illinois? They have many kinds of problems: social, relational, environmental, academic, psychological, and physical problems. Children today have issues navigating a modern life dominated by endless screens, scrolling, and even more endless data.
And also, they have some problems that you’re supposed to have—problems that have been a critical part of growing up since the dawn of time.
Our culture is currently debating the medicalization of human problems, the credibility of medicine, the influence of the pharmaceutical industry, and the ethics of imposing medical authority as state policy. Covid lockdowns were a prime example of this, and, similar to universal mental health screening, they were imposed without consideration of the unintended consequences.
Mandatory Covid vaccinations also led many Americans to rethink the role of government in their bodily autonomy, and to consider how arbitrary social policy could be when it claimed to be for the greater good (e.g., insisting that those with immunity to Covid must still get vaccinated). For those who have grown skeptical of medical authority, universal mental health screening will likely be viewed as another overextension of the government into the lives (and minds) of their children. Children aged 12-17 can already receive psychotherapy in Illinois without parental consent; universal screening offers a new on-ramp to this process.
The new Illinois law seems almost tone deaf, out of step with the lessons learned from Covid. This critique is cultural, social, and ethical in nature. But universal mental health screening is supposedly based on science. The new Illinois law does not give details; it just authorizes universal screening as if it is an unmitigated good. The devil (and the science, or lack thereof) will be in these details – how the policy is implemented. Assuming that the rationale for universal screening is scientific, we present critically important questions that should be addressed as procedures are developed:
- What is the evidence that universal mental health screening improves real-world outcomes for children? Is there evidence that it could cause harm? The scientific rationale for the program needs to be stated clearly, citing compelling data, and explicitly addressing the measures taken to avoid harm.
- Given that Illinois has already implemented universal mental health screening in some school districts, what were the outcomes for the children? After testing positive for a mental health condition, how many were further assessed, and how much time was spent on each child? How many ended up in psychotherapy or on medication? Usually, a pilot program tests the effectiveness of an intervention, and it is only adopted on a wide scale if it is shown to be effective and not harmful – where is that data?
- How many children a year does Illinois expect to inaccurately identify as having a mental health problem (e.g., how many false positives)? How many children will make it from 3rd to 12th grade without ever screening positive? What measures will address the known issue of false-positive results in universal screening? Do Illinois public schools have the time, money, and expertise to carefully assess each child who screens positive for multiple hours to ensure that they do not overdiagnose and overtreat Illinois children? If universal screening results in a surge of children who ultimately end up on psychiatric medication, how will the public know? Implementing this program without addressing these issues ignores the potential harm of universal screening.
- How will Illinois taxpayers know if this program is a success? What metrics will be tracked? The easy out is to focus on the implementation of the program, and if a high proportion of children are screened, call it a success, never mind the details or outcomes. But using the screening of children as a measure of success for a universal screening program is tautology; data must be collected that demonstrates that the program helps children measurably and does not harm them.
There are good reasons to object to the new Illinois program based on general principles. If the issues above go unaddressed, or if sufficient resources are not provided to allow careful and precise identification of children in distress, it has the potential to be a disaster.
Cooper Davis is an advocate, speaker, and writer. He is the Executive Director of Inner Compass Initiative (ICI), a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that advocates for mental health system reform and helps people make informed choices about psychiatric diagnoses, drugs, and drug withdrawal.
ILLINOIS TO FORCE MENTAL EXAMS ON KIDS
The HighWire with Del Bigtree | August 21, 2025
A shocking new Illinois law will force public schools to conduct annual mental health checks on students from 3rd through 12th grade. Jefferey exposes the hidden risks and potential harm this invasive mandate could bring to children.
BC Nurse Fined and Suspended Over Gender Policy Criticism
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | August 20, 2025
A British Columbia nurse has been hit with a one-month license suspension and ordered to pay over $93,000 in legal fees for publicly supporting women’s access to female-only spaces, a stance that the province’s nursing regulator deemed unprofessional.
Amy Hamm, who has spent more than 13 years working in healthcare and had risen to the position of nurse educator, was disciplined by the British Columbia College of Nurses and Midwives (BCCNM) after a years-long process sparked by her political expression outside of work.
The controversy dates back to 2020, when Hamm co-sponsored a Vancouver billboard that read, “I ♥ JK Rowling.”
The message, referencing the author’s defense of sex-based rights, triggered backlash from activists and a city councillor. The ad was removed, and formal complaints were submitted to the College, accusing Hamm of hate speech and transphobia.
In response, the College launched an exhaustive investigation into Hamm’s public activity over several years, compiling a 332-page report that examined her tweets, writing, and podcast appearances from 2018 to 2021.
After 22 hearing days stretched across 18 months, the disciplinary panel concluded that four of Hamm’s statements crossed the line into professional misconduct.
The panel claimed that Hamm made comments about transgender individuals that they deemed discriminatory. Hamm has not accepted this finding and is already appealing it at the Supreme Court of British Columbia.
Her legal counsel, Lisa Bildy, said, “In our view, the panel made a number of legal and factual errors that make the decision unsound, and we look forward to arguing these points before the BC Supreme Court. We are now considering whether to appeal the penalty decision as well.”
Bildy also raised broader concerns about the implications for free speech: “This decision effectively penalizes a nurse for expressing mainstream views aligned with science and common sense. The Panel’s ruling imposes a chilling effect on free expression for all regulated professionals.”
Hamm remains defiant. “The College has chosen to punish me for statements that are not hateful, but truthful. I’m appealing because biological reality matters, and so does freedom of expression. I want to express my thanks to the thousands of Canadians who continue to fund my legal case through donations to the Justice Centre,” she said.
The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, which is representing Hamm, announced the penalty and reiterated its commitment to pushing back against professional censorship.
Totalitarian Practices in Moldova Reach Unprecedented Levels – Moscow
Sputnik – 21.08.2025
The use of totalitarian methods in Moldova has reached unprecedented levels, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said on Thursday.
“Continuing the anti-popular policy of ‘filtering’ voters based on loyalty, on August 15, the official authorities in Chisinau announced plans to open only 10 polling stations in Transnistria. For comparison, during the 2024 presidential elections, 30 polling stations were organized there. This means that Moldovan citizens living in Transnistria, as well as those in Russia, have been classified as second-class voters by the Moldovan authorities, whose constitutional rights can be disregarded,” Zakharova said in a statement published on the Russian Foreign Ministry website.
She added that Moscow is receiving numerous complaints from the residents of Transnistria, who do not understand the reasons for their discrimination compared to the Moldovan diaspora in EU countries, for whom the best possible voting conditions are created.
“We expect that the observation mission of the OSCE ODIHR, which started last week, will give an objective assessment of Chișinau’s selective approach to its citizens. The authorities’ disregard for the interests of a significant part of Moldovan society is provoking an increase in protest activity, which is being harshly suppressed,” Zakharova emphasized.
She further stated that the use of totalitarian practices ahead of Moldova’s parliamentary elections has reached unprecedented levels.
“The Maya Sandu regime is turning the republic into a ghetto, where political repression, censorship, and the division of citizens into first, second, third, and other classes have become the norm. We are confident that, against the backdrop of the shameful silence of relevant international bodies, the Moldovan people will soon make their voice heard. While patient, they are not patient enough to allow another four years of suffering and abuse of themselves and their country,” she concluded.
Jurij Kofner: Europe Enters Century of Humiliation?
Glenn Diesen | August 20, 2025
Jurij Kofner is an economist and an economic policy advisor to AfD. Kofner discusses the de-industrialisation and economic decline in Germany, and the wider socio-economic and political challenges that continue to threaten the relevance of Europe.
Featured Video
Matt Bracken: Hezbollah Re-Arming With Massive Help From Iran
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Examples of hate speech by Israel against Palestine
1. “There is a huge gap between us (Jews) and our enemies, not just in ability but in morality, culture, sanctity of life, and conscience. They are our neighbors here, but it seems as if at a distance of a few hundred meters away, there are people who do not belong to our continent, to our world, but actually belong to a different galaxy.” Israeli president Moshe Katsav. The Jerusalem Post, May 10, 2001
2. “The Palestinians are like crocodiles, the more you give them meat, they want more”…. Ehud Barak, Prime Minister of Israel at the time – August 28, 2000. Reported in the Jerusalem Post, August 30, 2000
3. ” [The Palestinians are] beasts walking on two legs.” Menahim Begin, speech to the Knesset, quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, “Begin and the Beasts”. New Statesman, 25 June 1982.
4. “The Palestinians” would be crushed like grasshoppers … heads smashed against the boulders and walls.” Isreali Prime Minister (at the time) in a speech to Jewish settlers New York Times April 1, 1988
5. “When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do about it will be to scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle.” Raphael Eitan, Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defence Forces, New York Times, 14 April 1983.
6. “How can we return the occupied territories? There is nobody to return them to.” Golda Maier, March 8, 1969.
… Continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Voters Don’t Want the Old GOP
- Former US officials who resigned over Gaza urge 2028 presidential candidates to reject architects of Biden-era policy
- Wired for War Crimes: Israeli spy-tech firm targeted Starlink users – researchers
- There is cautious optimism about ending the Ukraine war
- Here are the Bills Pushing Forward Authoritarian Control in Canada
- The accession of Ukraine could signal the collapse of the EU
- Italy puts Ukraine weapons package on hold – media
- US kills 5 in Pacific as unproven drug smuggling claims persist
- Iran Respects International Law, US & Israel are Rogue States
- Russia Helping Build a New Middle East /Trita Parsi
- If Americans Knew
- An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
- No Tricks Zone
- Germany’s Green Energy Transition Becoming Increasingly Expensive…Another 6 Trillion Euros!
- Sudden Stratospheric Warming, Powerful El Niño Combination May Lead To Extreme Europe Cold, Energy Crisis!
- Two New Studies Find Thwaites Glacier Melt Cannot Be Driven By Human Activity Or A Warming Ocean
- E-Cars Reduce CO2 Emissions By Only 41% Compared To Internal Combustion Engine Vehicles
- Predictions Made By Renowned Climate Professor Over Past Decades Have Been Proven To Be Poor
- New Study Suggests Large Regions Of The Pacific Ocean Have Been Cooling For The Last 80 Years
- Germany’s Green Energy Debacle: High Energy Costs Force Kahla Porzellan to Close After 182 Years!
- New Study: 50 Years Of The Most Aggressive ‘Net Zero’ Policies Can Only Affect The Global Climate By 0.03°C
- US September “Heat” Was No Record…Many Records Set Decades Ago
- Latest European Green Energy Debacle; Portugal’s Largest Flagship Solar Park Insolvent!
