Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Von der Leyen Unveils New EU Censorship Push, Online Digital ID Plans, in 2025 State of the Union Speech

Von der Leyen casts online “misinformation” as a contagion, folding speech regulation into the language of safety.

By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | September 11, 2025

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen used her 2025 State of the Union speech to unveil a raft of new regulatory measures that introduce new challenges for digital rights and freedom of expression across the continent and the world.

Framed as measures for public health, democracy, and child protection, the Commission is pushing the EU deeper into institutionalized censorship and online regulation.

Addressing the European Parliament, von der Leyen declared she is “appalled by the disinformation that threatens global progress on everything from measles to polio.”

Citing fears of a global health crisis, she introduced a “Global Health Resilience Initiative,” which she said the EU would lead.

This initiative is expected to tie online speech more tightly to global health narratives, laying the groundwork for broader suppression of dissenting views under the label of medical misinformation.

Another centerpiece of her address was the so-called “European Democracy Shield,” a program that we’ve covered in great detail, intended to streamline and centralize the Commission’s censorship machinery under the banner of fighting “foreign information manipulation and interference.”

Framing the internet as a battlefield, she said: “Our democracy is under attack. The rise in information manipulation and disinformation is dividing our societies.”

Expanding on that framework, she announced the creation of a new institution, the European Centre for Democratic Resilience.

According to von der Leyen, this center will allow the EU to scale up its ability “to monitor and detect information manipulation and disinformation.”

But the agenda didn’t stop there. She introduced the Media Resilience Program, which she claimed would support “independent journalism and media literacy.”

In practice, however, such efforts often result in government-approved messaging being amplified, while dissenting outlets don’t get funded.

Von der Leyen pointed to declining local journalism in rural communities and claimed: “This has created many news deserts where disinformation thrives…This is why we will launch a new Media Resilience Program – it will support independent journalism and media literacy.”

Despite the existing Digital Services Act already mandating age verification (and therefore digital ID) online, von der Leyen floated a new, even more restrictive direction for internet access among young people.

Drawing inspiration from Australia’s controversial 2024 Online Safety Amendment, which includes a social media ban for those under 16, she suggested the EU could move toward similar rules.

“Just as in my days, we as a society taught our children that they could not smoke, drink, and watch adult content until a certain age. I believe it is time we consider doing the same for social media,” she said.

The entire speech signals a continued consolidation of control over digital spaces by EU institutions, with a heavy focus on regulating speech and tightening access restrictions.

September 13, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

Zionist lawfare operation facing collapse?

By Kit Klarenberg | Al Mayadeen | September 13, 2025

On September 7th, notorious Zionist lobby group UK Lawyers For Israel published a joint letter, triggered by 86% of International Association of Genocide Scholars members backing a resolution declaring “Israel” is committing genocide in Gaza days earlier. The lengthy screed blamed Hamas for Tel Aviv’s mass slaughter of Palestinians since October 7th, and charged the Resistance group itself was in fact guilty of genocide, on the risible, purported basis that Operation Al-Aqsa Flood was intended “to destroy, in whole or in part, Jews and Israelis.”

UKLFI’s repulsive, inverted narrative of Tel Aviv’s 21st century Holocaust in Gaza was reportedly endorsed by close to 500 “legal, antisemitism, history, holocaust, and genocide scholars.” Yet, upon publication, multiple listed signatories angrily announced their names were included without consent, while denouncing the letter’s content in the strongest possible terms. Close inspection indicates several signatories are listed repeatedly, many are tied to Zionist lobby groups, and others – such as a professor of electrical engineering – are self-evidently not qualified to make any judgement on genocide whatsoever.

Such brazen fraud is par for the course for UKLFI. The group has a lengthy, deplorable history of targeting individuals and organisations via frivolous if not outright vexatious lawfare, falsely conflating criticism of the Zionist entity with antisemitism in order to neutralise Palestine solidarity in schools, universities, workplaces, hospitals, and elsewhere. UKLFI’s embarrassingly botched stunt is especially shameful this time round though, as the operation is presently embroiled in significant legal quandaries of its own. The situation is so dire that UKLFI could collapse.

As Al Mayadeen reported in August, a detailed complaint was filed against UKLFI by the Public Interest Law Centre and European Legal Support Center with Britain’s Solicitors Regulation Authority. The 114-page document accused the group of using the law for nakedly politicised intimidation purposes, and ostensibly operating as a legal body despite being unregulated and unaccountable. Adding to UKLFI’s woes, its charitable wing is concurrently under formal investigation by the Charity Commission For England and Wales, due to the pioneering research of advocacy group CAGE.

‘Validating Evidence’

Founded in 2010 – aptly following a “conference on lawfare” convened in an illegal Israeli settlement near Jerusalem [Al-Quds] – UKLFI quickly established itself at the forefront of a new, “more combative” strain of Tel Aviv’s lobbying in Britain. UKLFI’s website is entirely explicit about its rabid commitment to defending the Zionist entity by any means necessary. UKLFI avowedly provides “legal support including advocacy, research, advice and campaigning in combating attempts to undermine, attack and/or delegitimise Israel, Israeli organisations, Israelis and/or supporters of Israel.”

The organisation moreover aims “to contribute generally as lawyers to creating a supportive climate of opinion” in Britain towards the Zionist entity. CAGE forensically details how UKLFI’s stances are not only “fringe” within the legal profession, but reflect Zionism at its most extreme. For instance, the organisation’s representatives fervently argue the Occupied Palestinian Territories aren’t in fact in breach of international law. The UN has consistently found over many years these Israeli settlements are flagrantly illegal, and displaced Palestinians must be permitted to return home.

CAGE traces in forensic detail UKLFI’s intimate yet opaque ties with the Israeli government. In 2012, UKLFI jointly hosted a two-day seminar alongside the Zionist entity’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and London’s Israeli embassy on lawfare strategies. This included presentations on strategies to cripple the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, and how British laws – including the Public Order Act, legislation on Hate Speech, and civil suits for defamation – could be used to the detriment of Palestine solidarity.

In 2019, UKLFI chiefs consulted senior Israeli Ministry of Justice officials, seeking “assistance in finding or validating evidence to help” the organisation in “potential legal actions” brought against it by two pro-Palestine charities, after UKLFI libelously charged the pair were linked directly to proscribed terrorist groups. The Zionist lobby group has lodged bogus complaints against countless organisations, including leading Palestinian aid organisations, to the Charity Commission, and other authorities since birth. This includes Amnesty International, for accusing “Israel” of practicing apartheid. None have been upheld.

In 2016, UKLFI established a charitable wing – the pair are effectively indivisible, sharing patrons and personnel. The charity claims to offer pro bono education and training services, but CAGE notes this invariably amounts to “apologia for racial segregation and apartheid.” Its events routinely host Zionist Occupation Force representatives, and hardline Zionist figures and groups. Some speakers deny uncontroversially proven historic Israeli atrocities and massacres against Palestinians. Others offer advice to audiences on how to weaponise the law to further Tel Aviv’s interests locally and globally.

In 2019, UKLFI’s charitable wing hosted Regavim, an Israeli NGO that actively advocates for the destruction of Palestinian homes in the West Bank. The organisation itself employs lawfare, and via regulatory loopholes, facilitates the destruction and dismantling of Palestinian homes and infrastructure. In the process, per CAGE, “entire communities” are left “without proper roads, houses, or even water systems.” Regavim was founded by Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, and is Zionist entity-funded. Even liberal Israeli lobby groups harshly condemned the event.

A common UKLFI tactic is to bombard British regulatory bodies and private entities “to disrupt any public displays of solidarity for Palestine” in any context, problematising even the most basic expressions of support as somehow antisemitic. This has prompted numerous organisations to ban wearing Palestine badges or other paraphernalia by staff or students, and in extreme instances, led to employees losing their jobs. CAGE records:

“There are manifold cases in both the public and private sector of UKLFI writing to organisations and attempting to ensure staff of those organisations do not wear anything that might indicate support for Palestine… [UKLFI] doesn’t appear to have any cogent case for why expressing solidarity for Palestine necessitates Jewish people to feel unsafe – especially when considering the widespread support that the Palestinian cause has among Jewish groups in the UK.”

‘Encouraging Hamas’

UKLFI’s noxious activities have become turbocharged since the Gaza genocide’s eruption. Along the way, it has taken credit for the suspension of pro-Palestine NHS doctors, among other things. Meanwhile, in April 2024, UKLFI charity wing chief Natasha Hausdorff – formerly an Israeli Supreme Court clerk – testified to parliament’s Business and Trade Committee on British arms exports to the Zionist entity. She argued the flow of weapons should continue, dismissed confirmed Palestinian death tolls as fraudulent, and unbelievably praised Tel Aviv’s “consistent upholding of international humanitarian law.”

The next month, UKLFI deployed perverse arguments to deny the Zionist entity was deliberately starving Gazans. In a letter to the Co-operative Group opposing a motion to boycott Israeli products, UKLFI chief Jonathan Turner condemned a Lancet estimate of 186,000 Palestinians murdered by Tel Aviv during the genocide to date. He sickeningly suggested “Israel’s” unconscionable assault in fact delivered health benefits that could increase local life expectancy, such as a reduction in obesity, due to constricted access to unhealthy food and cigarettes.

In September that year, UKLFI dispatched a formal letter to the British government threatening legal action in the form of a judicial review unless a partial, token suspension of 30 arms export licences to “Israel” was reversed. Three months later, the lobby group submitted complaints to the Bar Standards Board and International Criminal Court against ICC chief prosecutor Karim Khan for seeking arrest warrants against Israeli leaders. UKLFI alleged Khan had breached professional conduct rules, by making false statements and misleading the ICC.

The Court responded by warning UKLFI to be “alive to their own ethical responsibilities and their duty not to mislead.” Clearly undeterred, in April 2025, Hausdorff testified to Parliament’s Foreign Affairs committee. She used the opportunity to dodge charges that “Israel” was deliberately starving Palestinians, repeatedly dismiss Palestinian statehood as a “fantasy”, and accuse Western governments – including Britain’s own – of somehow “encouraging Hamas”. Her comments elicited audible objections of “delusional” from committee chair Emily Thornberry, not recorded in official transcripts.

The next month, Hausdorff led a counter-protest in London against a public commemoration of Palestine’s 1948 ethnic cleansing – known as the Nakba – declaring the event an antisemitic blood libel, and saying that “the lie of the Nakba” was part of a wider attack on Jews. This was despite the commemoration’s sizeable Jewish presence. Hausdorff published her address on social media – one of “innumerable” examples of public statements contrary to international law she has made collated by CAGE, which triggered the Charity Commission probe.

None of UKLFI’s work could plausibly be characterised as fulfilling legitimate charitable or legal objectives. It’s a bitter irony indeed that the organisation, which has for a decade-and-a-half sought to corrupt and distort British law in service of Tel Aviv’s repugnant settler colonial project, and ruined countless careers and lives in the process, now finds itself effectively in the dock. UKLFI’s latest faux pas, like “Israel’s” recent failed attempt at regime change in Iran, is unambiguously indicative of a flailing entity on the verge of extinction.

September 13, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Leave a comment

US lawmakers introduce ‘thought police’ bill to strip citizens of passports over Israel criticism

The Cradle | September 13, 2025

A US congressman is introducing a bill that could potentially be used to deny US citizens the right to travel based solely on their speech, including for criticism of Israel, the Intercept reported on 13 September.

Introduced by Florida Congressman Brian Mast, chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, the bill would grant Secretary of State Marco Rubio the power to revoke the passports of US citizens in the same way he has revoked the green cards and visas of foreign nationals in the US for criticizing Israel.

In March, Secretary of State Rubio revoked the visa of Turkish doctoral student Rumeysa Ozturk after she wrote an opinion piece critical of Israel in the Tufts University student newspaper in 2024.

The op-ed did not mention Hamas, but called for boycotting and divesting from Israel.

One section of the bill grants the Secretary of State the ability to deny passports to people determined to have “knowingly aided, assisted, abetted, or otherwise provided material support to an organization the Secretary has designated as a foreign terrorist organization.”

The reference to “material support” disturbs civil liberties advocates because it is vague and can be interpreted to include speech and anti-war activism.

The Anti-Defamation League (ADL), which functions as a front for Israeli intelligence in the US, and the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law suggested in a letter last year that Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) was providing “material support” for Hamas by organizing campus protests against Israel’s genocide of Palestinians in Gaza.

The provision regarding material support to terrorism poses a threat specifically to journalists, The Intercept noted.

In 2023, Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas demanded a Justice Department “national security investigation” of AP, CNN, The New York Times, and Reuters after they published photos taken by freelance photographers during the Hamas attack on Israeli settlements and military bases on 7 October 2023.

September 13, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Leave a comment

Charlie Kirk refused Netanyahu funding offer, was ‘frightened’ by pro-Israel forces before death, friend reveals

By Max Blumenthal and Anya Parampil | The Grayzone | September 12, 2025

A Trump insider and longtime friend of Charlie Kirk tells The Grayzone how the assassinated conservative leader’s turning point on Israeli influence provoked a private backlash from Netanyahu’s allies that left him angry and afraid.

The source said anxiety spread within the Trump administration after an apparent Israeli spying operation was uncovered.

Charlie Kirk rejected an offer earlier this year from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to arrange a massive new infusion of Zionist money into his Turning Point USA (TPUSA) organization, America’s largest conservative youth association, according to a longtime friend of the slain commentator speaking on the condition of anonymity. The source told The Grayzone that the late pro-Trump influencer believed Netanyahu was trying to cow him into silence as he began to publicly question Israel’s overwhelming influence in Washington and demanded more space to criticize it.

In the weeks leading up to his September 10 assassination, Kirk had come to loathe the Israeli leader, regarding him as a “bully,” the source said. Kirk was disgusted by what he witnessed inside the Trump administration, where Netanyahu sought to personally dictate the president’s personnel decisions, and weaponized Israeli assets like billionaire donor Miriam Adelson to keep the White House firmly under its thumb.

According to Kirk’s friend, who also enjoyed access to President Donald Trump and his inner circle, Kirk strongly warned Trump last June against bombing Iran on Israel’s behalf. “Charlie was the only person who did that,” they said, recalling how Trump “barked at him” in response and angrily shut down the conversation. The source believes the incident confirmed in Kirk’s mind that the president of the United States had fallen under the control of a malign foreign power, and was leading his own country into a series of disastrous conflicts.

By the following month, Kirk had become the target of a sustained private campaign of intimidation and free-floating fury by wealthy and powerful allies of Netanyahu – figures he described in an interview as Jewish “leaders” and “stakeholders.”

“He was afraid of them,” the source emphasized.

At TPUSA, the rift with Israel widens

Kirk was 18 years old when he launched TPUSA in 2012. From its inception, his career was propelled by Zionist donors, who showered his young organization with money through neoconservative outfits like the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He repaid his wealthy backers over the years by unleashing a relentless firehose of anti-Palestinian and Islamophobic diatribes, accepting propaganda trips to Israel, and sternly shutting down nationalist forces challenging his support for Israel during TPUSA events. In the Trump era, few American gentiles had proved more valuable to the self-proclaimed Jewish state than Charlie Kirk.

But as Israel’s genocidal assault on the besieged Gaza Strip drove an unprecedented backlash within grassroots right-wing circles, where only 24% of younger Republicans now sympathize with Israel over the Palestinians, Kirk began to shift. At times, he toed the Israeli line, spreading disinformation about babies beheaded by Hamas on October 7, and denying the famine imposed on the population of Gaza. Yet he simultaneously ceded to his base, wondering aloud if Jeffrey Epstein was an Israeli intelligence asset, questioning whether the Israeli government allowed the October 7 attacks to proceed in order to advance long-term political goals, and parroting narratives familiar to his most vociferous critic on the right, streamer Nick Fuentes.

This July, at his TPUSA Student Action Summit, Kirk provided a forum for the right-wing grassroots to vent its fury about Israel’s political hammerlock on the Trump administration. There, speakers from former Fox News stalwarts Tucker Carlson and Megyn Kelly, to the anti-Zionist Jewish comedian Dave Smith, denounced Israel’s blood-soaked assault on the besieged Gaza Strip, branded Jeffrey Epstein as an Israeli intelligence asset, and openly taunted Zionist billionaires like Bill Ackman for “getting away with scams” despite having “no actual skills.”

Following the confab, Kirk was bombarded with infuriated text messages and phone calls from Netanyahu’s wealthy allies in the US, including many who had funded TPUSA. According to his longtime friend, the Zionist donors treated Kirk with outright contempt, essentially ordering him to fall back into line.

“He was being told what you’re not allowed to do, and it was driving him crazy,” Kirk’s friend recalled. The conservative youth leader was not only alienated by the hostile nature of the interactions, but “frightened” by the backlash.

The friend’s account dovetails with those of multiple right-wing commentators with access to Kirk.

“I think, in the end, Charlie was going through a spiritual transformation,” Candace Owens, a conservative influencer who shifted decisively against Israel after October 7, reflected after her friend’s killing. “I know it, he was going through a lot. There was a lot of pressure, and it’s hard for me to watch the people who were pressuring him just say the things that they’re saying.”

She continued: “They wanted him to lose everything for changing or even slightly modifying an opinion. It’s very hurtful to me.”

Kirk appeared visibly outraged during an August 6 interview with conservative host Megyn Kelly, as he discussed the menacing messages he was receiving from pro-Israel bigwigs.

“It’s all of the sudden: ‘oh, Charlie: he’s no longer with us.’ Wait a second—what does ‘with us’ mean, exactly? I’m an American, okay? I represent this country,” he explained, before addressing the powerful Zionist interests harassing him.

“The more that you guys privately and publicly call our character into question—which is not isolated, it would be one thing if it were just one text, or two texts; it is dozens of texts—then we start to say, ‘whoa, hold the boat here,’” Kirk continued. “To be fair, some really good Jewish friends say, ‘that’s not all of us’… But these are leaders here. These are stakeholders.”

He went on to complain to Kelly, “I have less ability… to criticize the Israeli government than actual Israelis do. And that’s really, really weird.”

In one of his final interviews, conducted with Israel’s premier influencer in the United States, Ben Shapiro, Kirk once again tried to raise the issue of censorship of Israel critics.

“A friend said to me, interestingly: ‘Charlie, okay, we’ve pushed back against the media on COVID, on lockdowns, on Ukraine, on the border,’” Kirk told Shapiro on September 9. “Maybe we should also ask the question: is the media totally presenting the truth when it comes to Israel? Just a question!”

According to Kirk’s longtime friend, Kirk’s resentment of Netanyahu and the Israel lobby was spreading within Trump’s inner circle. In fact, they said, the president himself was terrified of Netanyahu’s wrath, and feared the consequences of defying him.

During the past year, the Trump insider was told by contacts in the White House that the Secret Service had caught Israeli government personnel placing electronic devices on its emergency response vehicles on two separate occasions.

While The Grayzone was unable to confirm the story with the Secret Service or White House, such an incident would not have been unprecedented. Indeed, according to a report in Politico citing three former senior US officials, a cellphone spying device was placed by Israeli agents “near the White House and other sensitive locations around Washington” toward the end of Trump’s first term in 2019.

Former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson recounted a similar incident in his memoir, writing that his security team found a listening device in his bathroom soon after Netanyahu used his personal toilet.

The Israel-did-it theory

Kirk was killed this September 10 with a single shot fired by a sniper apparently positioned on a rooftop 200 meters away. He was shot while seated before a crowd of thousands at Utah State University in Orem, Utah on the first leg of his American Comeback Tour. The scene of Kirk collapsing from the impact of a gunshot to his neck just as he began answering a question about transgender mass shooters was perhaps the most shockingly vivid spectacle of assassination – and certainly the most viral – in human history.

There is currently no evidence of an Israeli government role in Kirk’s assassination. However, that has not stopped thousands of social media users from speculating that the pro-Trump operative’s shifting views on the issue contributed in some way to his death. By the time of publication, over 100,000 Twitter/X users have liked a September 11 post by libertarian influencer Ian Carroll declaring about Kirk, “He was their friend. He basically dedicated his life to them. And they murdered him in front of his family. Israel just shot themselves.”

Many advancing the unsubstantiated theory have pointed to a Twitter/X post by Harrison Smith, a personality at the pro-Trump Infowars network, stating on August 13 – almost a month before Kirk’s assassination – that he was told by “someone close to Charlie Kirk that Kirk thinks Israel will kill him if he turns against Israel.”

The frenzied speculation has set off shockwaves in Tel Aviv, where Netanyahu was compelled to explicitly deny that his government killed Kirk during a September 11 interview with NewsMax.

Netanyahu and his allies bury the Kirk crisis as “big tent” collapses

That appearance was just one of several interviews and statements the Prime Minister dedicated to Kirk in the wake of his killing in an effort to frame the late conservative leader’s legacy in a uniformly pro-Israel light. The major public relations push has occurred while Netanyahu wages a military campaign on seven fronts, punctuated by a regional assassination spree that most recently reached into the heart of Qatar, a US ally.

Netanyahu first tweeted prayers for Kirk at 3:02 PM in the afternoon on September 10, minutes after news of the shooting broke. He has since authored three additional posts about Kirk, even breaking away from the Israeli war cabinet to spend the afternoon of September 11 memorializing the conservative leader on Fox News.

During that interview, Netanyahu did his best to insinuate that Israel’s enemies were responsible for murdering Kirk, despite the fact no suspect was named or in custody at the time:

“The radical Islamists and their union with the ultra-progressives—they often speak about ‘human rights,’ they speak about ‘free speech’—but they use violence to try to take down their enemies,” the Prime Minister told Harris Faulkner.

In a September 10 Twitter/X post eulogizing the conservative leader, the Israeli Prime Minister described a recent phone conversation with Kirk.

“I spoke to him only two weeks ago and invited him to Israel,” Netanyahu declared. “Sadly, that visit will not take place.”

Left unmentioned was whether Kirk declined the invitation—just as he did with the Prime Minister’s offer to reload TPUSA’s coffers with donations from his coterie of wealthy American Jewish cutouts.

At the time of publication, a 22-year-old resident of Utah has been taken into custody after supposedly confessing to killing Kirk. The public may soon learn the true motives of the alleged assassin. Perhaps they will fuel the narrative which Trump and his allies advanced in the immediate wake of the shooting – that a leftist radical was responsible, and that a wave of draconian repression must follow.

But after the shooter’s initial escape and a series of federal law enforcement mishaps, a large sector of Americans will likely never believe the official story. Nor will they ever know where Kirk’s turning point on Israel would have taken the conservative movement.

Four days before the assassination, frustration among pro-Israel commentators bubbled over in public during a Fox News interview in which Ben Shapiro launched a chilling attack on Kirk without naming him.

“The problem with a ‘big tent’ is that you may end up with many clowns inside,” Shapiro told Fox host and fellow Zionist gatekeeper Mark Levin in an apparent critique of TPUSA.

“Just because you’re saying somebody votes Republican—that doesn’t mean that they ought to be the preacher at the front of the church, they’re not the person that ought to be leading the movement, if they are spending all day criticizing the President of the United States as ‘covering up a Mossad rape ring’ or ‘being a tool of the Israelis for hitting an Iranian nuclear facility.’”

When Kirk took his usual place at the “front of the church” four days later, he was cut down by a sniper’s bullet.

Within 24 hours of Kirk’s death, Shapiro announced that he would be launching his own campus speaking tour, vowing: “We’re gonna pick up that blood stained microphone where Charlie left it.”

September 12, 2025 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , | Leave a comment

Israeli Strikes on Media Offices Kill At Least 25 Journalists in Yemen

By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | September 12, 2025

An Israeli attack on Yemen hit the offices of two newspapers in Sanaa, killing dozens of journalists and civilians. The Yemeni Journalists Union condemned the attack, labeling it a heinous war crime.

According to the Yemeni Health Ministry, the Israeli strikes hit the offices of the 26 September newspaper and Al-Yemen newspaper, killing at least 25 journalists. 26 September is the military’s media outlet, and Al-Yemen is one of the most read newspapers in Yemen.

The Yemeni Journalists Union said it “strongly condemns the heinous war crime committed by the brutal Israeli aggression on Wednesday, 10 September 2025, through its direct targeting of the offices of 26 September newspaper and Al-Yemen newspaper in the capital.”

Yemeni authorities report that at least 46 people were killed in strikes across Sanaa. A military facility and a fuel station were targeted along with media offices. The death toll is expected to rise as rescue and recovery efforts are ongoing. More than 165 people were injured.

The majority of those killed, 38, died in the strikes on Sanaa, which targeted residential areas.

The latest Israeli strikes in Yemen are part of the ongoing conflict between Tel Aviv and Ansar Allah. Ansar Allah, or the Houthis, control most of Yemen, including the capital city. After Israel began its onslaught and siege of Gaza, Ansar Allah placed a blockade of Israeli-linked shipping in the Red Sea.

In response to the blockade, Israel and the US have repeatedly bombed Yemen, killing a large number of civilians. The strikes have failed to break the blockade, and Ansah Allah has responded by direct attacks on Israel with missiles and drones.

The blockade has caused significant Financial losses to Israel’s Red Sea port. In July, the head of the Port of Eilat warned that the facility may have to shut down without additional financial assistance from Tel Aviv.

Yemeni leaders opposed to Ansar Allah warned US Senators that the strikes in Yemen have only empowered the Houthis. The warning was sent following an Israeli attack that killed political leaders, including the prime minister.

September 12, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

PCHR Report Exposes Israel’s War on Journalists and Media Institutions in Gaza

21st Century Wire | September 9, 2025

Yesterday marked a devastating event for the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights (PCHR) as their headquarters in Al-Roya Tower, Gaza City, was obliterated by an airstrike from the Israeli Occupation Force. This attack is part of a disturbing pattern of systematic assaults on high-rise buildings throughout the city. Just following PCHR’s announcement of their new report, “Assassination of Truth: Killing of Journalists amid Genocide in Gaza,” Avichay Adraee, spokesman for the Israeli Occupation Forces, casually declared the intention to target and demolish Al-Roya Tower, home to PCHR’s vital work. The timing and intent behind these actions raise serious questions about the protection of human rights and freedom of expression in these turbulent times.

The PCHR office, perched on the 12th floor of the Al-Roya Tower, has unfortunately faced relentless bombardment and significant damage since the onset of the conflict. In addition, the Israeli Occupation Forces raided the premises, even converting it into a military base during their previous ground operations in Gaza City. As a result, the office has been rendered inoperable, highlighting the heavy toll on journalists working in Gaza. It is also important to mention that the PCHR offices located in Khan Younis and Jabalia were demolished last year.

PCHR’s new report paints a vivid and harrowing picture of the crimes committed, backed by compelling firsthand accounts from victims, witnesses, and their families, along with insights from legal experts and international sources. It shines a light on the shocking obliteration of 112 media institutions—ranging from TV and radio stations to newspaper headquarters—forcing journalists in Gaza to operate under extreme peril, often from makeshift tents, all while living with the constant threat of assassination.

The report reveals a troubling pattern: since October 7, Israel has actively targeted individuals who are brave enough to document the crisis in Gaza, effectively trying to suppress the truth and documented evidence of the Gaza genocide. Shockingly, during this period, Israeli Occupation Forces have killed 221 journalists, injured 415 more, and have arbitrarily detained at least 86 individuals. Many have faced torture and inhumane conditions, with 16 still in detention and 4 having mysteriously disappeared, according to PCHR. It’s a stark reminder of the dangers faced by those committed to reporting the realities on the ground.

The report calls on the global community to urge the Israeli authorities to promptly permit foreign journalists and international media representatives to access the Gaza Strip.

September 9, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

All messenger apps are ‘transparent’ to spy agencies – Kremlin

RT | September 7, 2025

Messaging apps are “absolutely transparent” to intelligence agencies and security services, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. People who use them to share sensitive information should be aware of the risks, he added.

“All messengers are absolutely transparent systems, and people who use them should understand that they are transparent… to the security services,” Peskov told journalists on Friday at the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivostok, Russia.

He added that it is particularly important to consider the risks when sensitive government or commercial data is shared through these apps, which can be accessed by foreign intelligence services.

Peskov was commenting on Telegram and WhatsApp in Russia, as well as the Russian government’s support for developing a domestic messaging platform.

Russian security services have accused Telegram and WhatsApp of using double standards for refusing to share data with the Russian authorities about fraud and terrorist plots while complying with similar requests from other countries.

In July, a member of the State Duma’s committee on information policy and technology, Anton Nemkin, called WhatsApp’s continued presence in Russia a “legalized breach of national security.”

Russian law enforcement officials have said that Ukrainian intelligence, along with other malicious actors such as swindlers and con artists, often relies on databases containing personal data obtained through WhatsApp and Telegram to recruit agents or identify targets inside Russia.

In December 2024, the US government also warned senior officials to switch to encrypted communications after a security breach in which a group of hackers stole data, including information stored under US government surveillance protocols as part of “legal” wiretapping of American suspects.

September 8, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance | | Leave a comment

Australia Orders Tech Giants to Enforce Age Verification Digital ID by December 10

A safety law that reads like a blueprint for a surveillance state

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | September 8, 2025

Australia is preparing to enforce one of the most invasive online measures in its history under the guise of child safety.

With the introduction of mandatory age verification across social media platforms, privacy advocates are warning that the policy, set to begin December 10, 2025, risks eroding fundamental digital rights for every user, not just those under 16.

eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant has told tech giants like Google, Meta, TikTok, and Snap that they must be ready to detect and shut down accounts held by Australians under the age threshold.

She has made it clear that platforms are expected to implement broad “age assurance” systems across their services, and that “self-declaration of age will not, on its own, be enough to constitute reasonable steps.”

The new rules stem from the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Act 2024, which gives the government sweeping new authority to dictate how users verify their age before accessing digital services. Any platform that doesn’t comply could be fined up to $31M USD.

While the government claims the law isn’t a ban on social media for children under 16, in practice, it forces platforms to block these users unless they can pass age checks, which means a digital ID.

There will be no penalties for children or their parents, but platforms face immense legal and financial pressure to enforce restrictions, pressure that almost inevitably leads to surveillance-based systems.

The Commissioner said companies must “detect and de-activate these accounts from 10 December, and provide account holders with appropriate information and support before then.”

These expectations extend to providing “clear, age-appropriate communications” and making sure users can download their data and find emotional or mental health resources when their accounts are terminated.

She further stated that “efficacy will require layered safety measures, sometimes known as a ‘waterfall approach’,” a term often associated with collecting increasing amounts of personal data at multiple steps of user interaction.

Such layered systems often rely on facial scanning, government ID uploads, biometric estimation, or AI-powered surveillance tools to estimate age.

Privacy campaigners warn that these approaches risk normalizing the constant collection of sensitive personal data, building infrastructure that could easily be repurposed for broader tracking or profiling.

To support enforcement, eSafety has launched a self-assessment tool for companies to determine whether their services are covered by the law.

The Commissioner noted that the tool would help companies figure out if “any of their services may be excluded” under the legislative rules issued by the Minister for Communications.

However, most major social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, YouTube, and X are almost certain to be included.

eSafety is also developing regulatory guidance to clarify what “reasonable steps” will mean in practice.

The Commissioner has made it clear that platforms must already be preparing to prevent children from manipulating settings to bypass restrictions, ensure that complaint mechanisms are functional and accessible, and plan for full implementation ahead of the December deadline.

Citing consultations with over 160 organizations and more than 50 young people aged 13 to 23, the Commissioner claims there is “strong community support for measures to better protect children online.”

She added, “Australians have told us they want strong, practical protections that keep children safe without compromising privacy or fairness. We have listened, and this feedback is shaping the guidance we are putting in place for industry.”

However, many in the privacy and digital rights communities question whether such a balance is possible when the state’s approach is to compel private companies to verify the age of every user, regardless of whether they’re children.

The phrase “without compromising privacy” rings hollow for those who recognize that age verification at this scale often relies on intrusive surveillance methods that compromise anonymity for everyone, not just young users.

The government maintains that only services with core social networking features are affected.

Online games and basic messaging apps may be excluded. But messaging functions embedded in social media platforms, like DMs on Instagram or group chats on Snapchat, will fall under the new restrictions. The definition is broad enough that many widely used platforms could be swept into the regulatory net.

Although the Commissioner has publicly insisted that safety and privacy “do not have to be mutually exclusive,” the architecture required to meet the government’s demands suggests otherwise.

Once systems are in place to scan faces, verify IDs, or track user activity for the sake of age assurance, they can be leveraged for other purposes by platforms or the state.

Australia’s move places it at the frontier of a growing global trend where safety rhetoric is used to justify mass surveillance.

Privacy advocates argue that introducing mandatory identification online not only limits access but also normalizes tracking in digital spaces that once allowed for anonymity, freedom of expression, and private communication.

Despite these concerns, the Commissioner urged platforms not to delay. “This is the time for companies to start mobilizing and planning for implementation,” she said, adding that “children, parents and carers are counting on services to deliver on their obligations and prepare their young users and the trusted adults in their lives for this monumental change.”

September 8, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

Europe kills democracy to save liberalism

By Raphael Machado | Strategic Culture Foundation | September 8, 2025

The latest opinion polls are extremely indicative of a radical political shift in the European landscape.

In Germany, the Alternative for Germany (AfD) gathers the preferences of 26% of voters, which clearly positions it as the largest opposition party. When the voting intentions for the CDU and CSU are separated, the AfD then becomes the most popular German party.

Meanwhile, in France, the National Rally (RN) — now led by Jordan Bardella — already enjoys the support of 37% of citizens, placing it far ahead of its Macronist and progressive rivals. In the United Kingdom, Nigel Farage’s Reform UK also leads in the polls with 30% of voting intentions. Also leading is the Freedom Party of Austria, with 37% popular support. And in a similar situation, we see the Party for Freedom in the Netherlands, with 33% of voting intentions.

Further down in their respective countries, we see Chega in Portugal as the second most popular party, with 23% of voting intentions. Also in second place are the Sweden Democrats, with 20% of voting intentions, and Norway’s Progress Party, with 22%.

Other European countries see similar parties in solid third-place positions, such as in Denmark, Belgium, Finland, and Poland. And if we discount Meloni’s “Brothers of Italy,” we also see the Lega in Italy in a similar situation.

We are very clearly facing a political trend that goes far beyond a localized phenomenon. The phenomenon is continental and, as it represents a gradual increase over years, apparently lasting. These parties will not eventually return to political marginality and seem to be here to stay.

It is inevitable to consider that the rise of these parties challenging the liberal order is a consequence of the special military operation. The trade and energy rupture generated some significant economic problems in Europe. The German economy shrank, while the French and Italian economies stagnated. Most European countries also faced an inflationary crisis in 2022 and, to control inflation, had to further tighten public spending with austerity policies, as well as increase interest rates. Unemployment also rose, especially in Germany, where several factories have been closed in the last 2 years.

Furthermore, it does not go unnoticed that the leaders of the UK, France, and Germany have increasingly resorted to inflammatory rhetoric hinting at sending their countries’ youth to fight against Russia in Ukraine.

But the strengthening of conservative populism in Europe is not a new phenomenon. It is a gradual evolution that has been building for 20 years, and its main cause is mass immigration, with all its nefarious consequences in the realms of security, economy, culture, etc.

We imagine that such a phenomenon is not considered desirable by the current European elites. Otherwise, one could not explain the judicial offensive against the AfD aimed at banning the party, nor the lawfare practiced against Marine Le Pen making her ineligible, and even less the entire mobilization to arrest Calin Georgescu in Romania, as well as the strange maneuvers that led to the defeat of George Simion in that country’s presidential elections.

But apparently, the situation does not stop at lawfare and potentially illegal judicial maneuvers.

In France, a wave of deaths seems to be linked to Macron, with center-right legislator Olivier Marleix and François Freve (a plastic surgeon linked to Brigitte Macron) on the list of suspicious deaths. Now, more recently, there are reports of at least 7 mysterious deaths of AfD politicians from North Rhine-Westphalia on the eve of local elections.

Probably, these waves of mysterious deaths in France and Germany will never be solved, but a different atmosphere is clearly felt in Europe today. An atmosphere that is certainly less free than that of Europe a few decades ago.

Election manipulation, imprisonment of opposing candidates, mysterious deaths of critics, curtailment of freedom of expression; Western European countries are beginning to check all the boxes of typical dystopian tyrannies — what has been said about China, Russia, and North Korea that has not already become reality in the UK, Germany, and France?

It seems that to preserve “liberal democracy” against “extremists,” Europe is voluntarily abandoning all remnants of democracy.

September 8, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , , , | 3 Comments

UK arrests nearly 900 over support for Palestine Action activist group

Al Mayadeen | September 7, 2025

Nearly 900 people were arrested in the United Kingdom over the weekend during a protest in London in support of the banned pro-Palestinian group Palestine Action, according to the Metropolitan Police.

Authorities confirmed that 857 individuals were arrested under the Terrorism Act of 2000 for supporting a proscribed organization, with another 33 detained for separate offences, including alleged assaults on police officers.

Solidarity with Gaza targeted in crackdown

The protest, described by organizers as an expression of solidarity with Gaza, was held outside the UK Parliament and drew around 1,500 participants.

Many demonstrators carried signs condemning “Israel’s” aggression and genocide in Gaza and expressing support for Palestine.

This comes as “Israel” intensified its bombardment of Gaza and launched new strikes with the stated aim of seizing Gaza City to defeat the Palestinian resistance.

Critics have accused the UK government of using counterterrorism laws to suppress peaceful activism.

The United Nations and other human rights groups have condemned the July decision to designate Palestine Action as a terrorist organization, citing threats to civil liberties and free speech.

Police claim violence; organizers insist protest was peaceful

Of the 33 non-terrorism-related arrests, 17 were allegedly for assaults on officers. The police claimed their officers faced “intolerable” abuse. However, organizers from Defend Our Juries (DOJ), who coordinated the “Lift the Ban” rally, described it as “the picture of peaceful protest.”

Reports noted that many of those arrested were older individuals, some holding signs like “I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action.”

If convicted, the majority face up to six months in prison, while organizers could face sentences of up to 14 years.

Public figures, UN slam ban as legal overreach

The ban on Palestine Action was pushed by former interior minister Yvette Cooper, who accused the group of engaging in “aggressive and intimidatory attacks” against public and private institutions.

She also claimed that court-imposed reporting restrictions have limited public understanding of the group’s actions.

Nonetheless, public support for Palestine Action has grown since the group’s proscription, with many viewing the UK’s actions as an attempt to silence those who speak out against the war on Gaza and stand in solidarity with Palestine.

September 7, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance, Solidarity and Activism | , , , , | Leave a comment

UK anti-genocide activists face dozens of terrorism charges

The Cradle | September 5, 2025

UK authorities charged six campaigners with 42 terrorism offenses on 3 September over their efforts to challenge the ban on Palestine Action.

They were released on bail the following day and placed under a strict curfew. Following hearings at Westminster Magistrates Court, the defendants, including former government lawyer Tim Crosland, were granted bail after the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) requested they be held on remand.

Defend Our Juries (DOJ), the advocacy group to which the activists belong, said the judge’s decision prevented them from facing up to 18 months in custody due to court backlogs.

According to DOJ, the bail conditions include a tagged curfew between 7:00 am and 9:00 pm, a ban on contacting co-defendants, and a prohibition on supporting Palestine Action either “directly or indirectly.”

A DOJ spokesperson described the outcome as both relief and outrage. “We welcome the release of our key spokespeople and the judge’s decision to reject the CPS’s absurd attempt to remand them in prison for what could have been many months. However, the fact that they are now facing 42 charges between six of them and extraordinarily draconian bail conditions for hosting public Zoom calls is nothing short of a scandal.”

Police said the charges stem from an investigation led by the Counter Terrorism Command into allegations that the defendants coordinated protests and held 13 Zoom calls supporting Palestine Action.

Section 12 (2) of the Terrorism Act makes it a criminal offense to arrange a meeting in support of a proscribed organization, while Section 12 (3) criminalizes addressing such a meeting with the intent of encouraging support.

DOJ said the six were targeted by UK authorities when their homes were raided earlier this week, hours before they were due to announce details of a mass action planned for Saturday.

The group reported that homes were searched and the activists were held beyond the 24-hour custody limit before being charged.

The case follows the UK government’s 4 July decision to proscribe Palestine Action under anti-terror laws, a move triggered by an incident in which members broke into RAF Brize Norton and vandalized two military aircraft with paint and crowbars. The aircraft are reportedly linked to the genocidal war in Gaza and wider military operations across West Asia.

The designation equates the group with Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State, making public support for its activities punishable by up to 14 years in prison, a move strongly condemned by various groups and individuals as “grotesque,” “chilling,” and an “unprecedented legal overreach.”

September 5, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Leave a comment

Germany targets X executives in unprecedented criminal probe over refusal to hand over user data in “hate speech” cases

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | September 4, 2025

German authorities have opened a criminal investigation targeting three managers at X, accusing them of “obstruction of justice” for refusing to directly provide user data in online speech-related cases.

Two of the employees are American, and one of them is reportedly Diego de Lima Gualda, the former head of X’s operations in Brazil, who previously faced off against legal demands in his home country before resigning in April 2024.

The alleged problem for Germany is X’s policy of forwarding German requests for user data to US authorities, following procedures established under a bilateral Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT).

That treaty lays out the legal framework for cross-border data sharing, requiring requests from German prosecutors to be reviewed and processed through US legal channels before X is compelled to hand over user information.

Despite this legally grounded process, prosecutors in Göttingen have decided to treat the policy as criminal interference, marking what appears to be the first time in German legal history that social media executives are being investigated for how they respond to international legal requests.

German prosecutors have reportedly been frustrated by X’s unwillingness to grant them direct access to account data, particularly in cases involving posts that include banned symbols like swastikas or comments that authorities allege may amount to defamation.

The inability to obtain data has resulted in stalled investigations and dropped cases, including one where a post containing a swastika could not be traced to its author.

Although X restricted that post within Germany, the company declined to release identifying information.

X’s resistance has prompted anger from members of Germany’s pro-censorship political class.

Green Party MP Anna Lührmann labeled the standoff a “scandal” and demanded that government institutions leave the platform entirely. “This goes against fair competition and puts our democracy at risk,” she claimed, accusing Musk of algorithmically shaping discourse and undermining political fairness.

She also urged Chancellor Friedrich Merz to shut down his official presence on X and move to alternatives like Mastodon or Bluesky.

The Göttingen prosecutor’s office, which handles digital “hate speech” enforcement for Lower Saxony, was recently profiled in a 60 Minutes segment aired in the US back in February.

The episode followed German authorities as they conducted armed raids on citizens for online posts and stirred backlash in the United States, where such criminalization of speech is often seen as incompatible with basic civil liberties.

US Vice President JD Vance was among those who condemned the German approach, calling it a threat to transatlantic values and freedom of expression.

Meanwhile, X is fighting back in German courts. According to reporting from t-online, the company has retained the international law firm White & Case to challenge the legal demands from multiple German prosecutors. In case after case, X has argued that Germany’s demands for user data cannot override international treaties or US privacy protections.

In some German district courts, these challenges have been rejected.

Judges have ruled that Germany’s Telecommunications Digital Services Data Protection Act (TDDDG) grants prosecutors the authority to demand data and that social networks must comply even if they consider the law invalid or unlawful.

Senior public prosecutor Benjamin Krause confirmed that X had filed numerous motions to block requests, all of which leaned on contested interpretations of procedural law.

X’s legal strategy also includes a broader constitutional challenge. In February 2024, the company filed suit in the administrative court in Wiesbaden, asking the court to examine whether Section 22 of the TDDDG complies with both German constitutional protections and European Union law.

A ruling in that case could eventually be referred to either Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court or the European Court of Justice.

The German government is moving to criminally punish platform employees for not helping the state identify anonymous users who post controversial or politically sensitive content. This, of course, is a dangerous step with global implications.

September 5, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | 1 Comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »