Israel kills more Palestinian journalists in Gaza
Press TV – June 30, 2025
Israel continues to target Palestinian journalists covering the regime’s atrocities in Gaza, killing a number of them in Gaza City.
“Several Palestinian journalists were killed and others injured in an Israeli airstrike targeting al-Baqa Café in western Gaza City, where they had been working to upload news reports,” Rami Abdu, the founder of Chairman of Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor, said in a tweet on Monday.
Medical sources said at least 33 people were killed and dozens of others injured in the attack.
Most of the victims were “journalists, artists, and social media activists”, as the place is one of the few remaining internet access points in the strip,” Abdu added, amid internet blackout.
“It’s increasingly clear that Israel is deliberately targeting data upload hubs used by journalists to transmit reports and images.”
Among the victims was Ismail Abu Hatab, a photojournalist who worked with several media platforms and various outlets, Gaza’s Government Media Office said on Telegram.
The office “condemned in the strongest terms the systematic targeting, killing, and assassination of Palestinian journalists by the Israeli occupation”.
Since this morning, hospital sources said at least 80 people have been killed in Israeli strikes on Gaza.
Sources told Al-Jazeera that those killed include 57 Palestinians in northern Gaza, and 15 aid seekers near the so-called aid distribution centers north of the southern city of Rafah.
Israel launched the campaign of genocide in Gaza on October 7, 2023. It has killed over 56,530 Palestinians there so far, according to the health ministry of Gaza.
‘Every American Wearing a Wearable’ Is Not a Vision We Share
By Children’s Health Defense EMR & Wireless Team | The Defender | June 26, 2025
During recent congressional testimony, U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. stated:
“We’re about to launch one of the biggest advertising campaigns in HHS history to encourage Americans to use wearables … my vision is that every American is wearing a wearable within four years.”
Kennedy was responding to a question about whether consumers should continue to have access to wearables. He explained that wearables allow users to constantly track in real-time how food and lifestyle choices affect their health metrics. He also claimed that wearables are key to the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) agenda.
We agree that people should be able to monitor their health in innovative ways using the technology they choose. But we do not think the federal government should try to push wearables on every American.
A wearable is an electronic device — such as a smartwatch, fitness tracker or smart ring — worn on the body. It’s made up of dozens of sensors and wireless technologies that continuously collect, monitor and transmit biometric and other sensitive data.
“We do not share this vision,” said Miriam Eckenfels, director of the Children’s Health Defense (CHD) Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) & Wireless Program. “Quite the contrary, we oppose governmental pressure to incentivize the widespread use of wearables. They pose serious health risks, especially to children, and they threaten privacy.”
Wireless technologies, including wearables, have clear and well-documented harms. These devices continuously emit radiofrequency (RF) radiation in direct contact with the body for long periods of time.
They also have multiple transmitters/receivers (Bluetooth, Wi-Fi and cellular), operating on several different radio bands. Cumulative and long-term exposures have known significant risks.
RF radiation exposure is associated with a wide range of adverse health effects, including “increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being.”
A systematic review commissioned by the World Health Organization (WHO) last month concluded that there is “high certainty” evidence that cellphone radiation exposure causes two types of cancer in animals.
Higher-frequency millimeter wave (MMW) transmissions used in 5G cellular networks are also known to produce eye damage and skin burns. An industry study by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) concluded that overexposure to MMW is expected to produce burns “like those produced when a person touches hot objects or flames.”
Children, pregnant women at even greater risk
Children have smaller bodies, developing nervous systems, more conductive tissue and longer lifetimes of exposure compared to adults, putting them at even greater risk of harm from radiation exposure. Their cells are dividing and growing at a higher rate, so DNA damage is magnified.
Other vulnerable populations include pregnant women, and people with implanted devices, chronic health conditions and Electromagnetic Radiation Syndrome (EMR-S).
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued official guidance cautioning that individuals with pacemakers and other implanted medical devices should keep wearables like smartwatches at a distance due to potential interference and malfunction. Manufacturers like Apple also include guidelines and warnings for wearables.
This highlights a broader point: wearables are not safe or suitable for “every American.”
In 2021, CHD won a landmark case against the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), in which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that the FCC had failed to consider extensive evidence of harm from wireless radiation.
The court found that the FCC did not consider peer-reviewed scientific research on the harmful effects of wireless radiation exposure on children, the brain and nervous system, male fertility and people with EMR-S.
The ruling specifically cited the agency’s failure to address studies showing oxidative stress, DNA damage, and the health risks from modulation and cumulative exposure.
The court also ordered the agency to explain how its limits are protective. Yet almost four years later, the FCC has still not complied.
This ruling validated years of scientific evidence about the harms of wireless technology and confirmed that the public, including wearable users, continues to be actively misguided by industry and government agencies alike.
Biometric data collection raises privacy concerns
Wireless technologies also have extensive and well-documented privacy impacts. They continuously collect biometric data, including heart rate, quality of sleep, blood pressure, cholesterol levels, oxygen levels, calorie burn, sweat gland emissions, hormone levels, body temperature, emotional responses, movement and precise geolocation.
This biometric data is transmitted over the internet and can be used to create an intimate profile of the user’s physical and psychological states. This intimate profile can be made available to employers, medical providers, private corporations, artificial intelligence systems, insurance companies and government entities.
This surveillance infrastructure may lay the groundwork for psychological targeting, predictive modeling, social control and unprecedented intrusions into personal freedom.
These risks cannot be left out of any discussion of so-called “digital health.”
“We are eager to learn more about Secretary Kennedy’s full intent regarding wearables,” said Eckenfels. “The growing push for widespread adoption of wearables, which exposes users to constant RF radiation in direct contact with the body, is concerning and fundamentally at odds with the values of informed consent, privacy and bodily autonomy that CHD defends.”
Eckenfels added:
“The public deserves radical transparency about wearables’ health and privacy risks. Their use must remain a personal choice and not a public health objective. We do not share — indeed, we oppose — a vision where everyone is subject to constant wireless exposure in direct contact with the body and biometric tracking.
“What amounts to technocratic surveillance should not be normalized, encouraged and promoted at the federal level.”
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
UK arrests 4 in crackdown on Palestine Action over RAF incursion
Al Mayadeen | June 28, 2025
UK counterterrorism authorities have arrested four individuals in connection with a break-in at RAF Brize Norton, reportedly carried out by members of Palestine Action. The incident, which took place last Friday, involved activists entering the Royal Air Force base in Oxfordshire and spray painting on two military aircraft in protest against Britain’s support for “Israel” and its ongoing genocide in Gaza.
South East Counter Terrorism Police confirmed the arrests, stating that a 29-year-old woman without a fixed address, along with two men aged 36 and 24, were detained on “terrorism-related grounds”. A fourth suspect, a 41-year-old woman, was arrested on suspicion of “assisting an offender.”
Authorities said the three were being held under suspicion of committing, preparing, or instigating acts of terrorism, as defined under Section 41 of the Terrorism Act 2000.
Government crackdown on pro-Palestine activism
Following the arrests, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper announced her intention to designate Palestine Action as a proscribed organization under the UK’s Terrorism Act. If implemented, the designation would make it illegal to support, join, or promote the group, an escalation that has drawn concern from human rights advocates and civil liberties organizations.
On the same day, hundreds gathered in Trafalgar Square to express solidarity with the group, warning against the criminalization of activism aimed at opposing the UK’s complicity in supplying weapons to “Israel”.
In response, Palestine Action issued a statement via X, condemning the government’s treatment of the protest. “Despite us not being proscribed, the state is treating red paint on warplanes as an act of terrorism,” the group stated. It further revealed that the arrested activists were being held in solitary confinement without charge for several days.
Authorities moved quickly to suppress related demonstrations, dispersing planned rallies outside Parliament and pushing protesters into Trafalgar Square. Several arrests were made, with the Metropolitan Police citing public order risks. Meanwhile, counter-terrorism police have launched a broader security review across UK military installations.
Wider context
Palestine Action, founded in 2020 by British-Palestinian activist Huda Ammori and co-founder Richard Barnard, is known for its confrontational yet non-lethal tactics aimed at arms companies tied to “Israel’s” military-industrial complex. Previous campaigns have led to the temporary shutdown of Elbit Systems-linked factories in Oldham and Tamworth, as well as disrupted contracts with Israeli weapons suppliers.
Legal experts have raised doubts about whether Palestine Action meets the statutory requirements for proscription under the Terrorism Act 2000, which include posing a real threat to national security or British citizens. Critics argue that the group’s actions, while disruptive, remain rooted in civil disobedience rather than terrorism.
The proposed ban has renewed scrutiny of UK-“Israel” cooperation, with campaigners pointing to past evidence of coordination between British counterterrorism units and the Israeli embassy. Concerns are growing that this measure could set a precedent for further repression of pro-Palestine activism.
Families of detained activists face deepening uncertainty, as support efforts, ranging from legal aid to court appearances, could be criminalized. Foreign nationals involved in the group may also face deportation or visa revocation if the ban is enacted.
Washington’s unprecedented political war on Europe
By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – June 27, 2025
A dramatic U.S. political broadside against Europe signals not just strained transatlantic ties, but a deeper ideological rupture — one that could push the EU toward redefining itself as a fully autonomous global actor.
Notwithstanding tensions surrounding US tariffs on the EU, the future and role of NATO, and the conflict in Ukraine, US-EU tensions are escalating to an outright political and ideological rivalry. Washington’s political attacks on European states and their policies mark a significant shift towards the end of transatlantic unity and an opportunity for the EU to rediscover itself.
Washington’s political attacks on Europe
On May 27th, 2025, the US State Department published an essay that could go down in history as Washington’s charge sheet on Europe, expressing the depth of contention and resentment colouring the Trump administration’s ties with the continent currently. However, once set along this path of confrontation, there may not be a return to normal, transatlantic ties in the foreseeable future. The essay begins with narrating the history and depth of US-Europe ties. Immediately afterward, however, it shockingly mentions what was unthinkable until a few years ago. The US State Department sees Europe as a ‘different world’, different from what the US itself (supposedly) represents. To quote the letter: “What endures [in Europe] instead is an aggressive campaign against Western civilization itself. Across Europe, governments have weaponized political institutions against their own citizens and against our shared heritage. Far from strengthening democratic principles, Europe has devolved into a hotbed of digital censorship, mass migration, restrictions on religious freedom, and numerous other assaults on democratic self-governance”.
Liberalism is Bad
It is not just European politics facing Washington’s assault; it is also the underlying liberal political order of Europe itself. The letter accuses Europe of restricting political space and criminalising dissenting political voices. The reason is the failure of liberalism, according to the letter. “Our concerns are not partisan but principled. The suppression of speech, facilitation of mass migration, targeting of religious expression, and undermining of electoral choice threatens the very foundation of the transatlantic partnership. A Europe that replaces its spiritual and cultural roots, that treats traditional values as dangerous relics, and that centralizes power in unaccountable institutions is a Europe less capable of standing firm against external threats and internal decay. To this end, achieving peace in Europe and around the world requires not a rejection of our shared cultural heritage, but a renewal of it”, adds the letter.
This, according to the letter, is not a good sign for the future of US-European ties. It mentions Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who is said to have made clear that “Europe’s democratic backsliding not only impacts European citizens but increasingly affects American security and economic ties, along with the free speech rights of American citizens and companies”.
Beyond Mistrust
This letter reveals many things. Most importantly, it reveals the level of mistrust and gap that now divides the transatlantic world. It is no longer mere tactical disagreements over petty issues. This mistrust has at its roots in the political thinking of the Trump administration. Donald Trump understands the EU as a political arrangement created to “screw” the US. He and his political advisers are now trying to unscrew this arrangement to ‘free’ the US from the decades-old political bonds.
For Europeans, this is a major challenge. A report in the UK-based Financial Times said that Europe “is quickly becoming the latest front in a culture war Trump has unleashed against the bastions of liberalism. Most of his targets — elite universities, government agencies such as USAID, public broadcasters — have been domestic. But the Samson essay shows Maga’s ambitions go much further, and the movement is now prepared to deploy far beyond America’s borders”. According to this report, it is not the EU, which is the real threat to the US, but the US is the biggest threat to Europe itself.
How will Europe respond to this attack, which now has both political and cultural underpinnings? There is little denying that Europe needs to grapple with prospects of a potential ‘de-coupling’ from the US. This de-coupling will create, at least in the immediate future, an urgent need for policy correction on several fronts. From negotiating the trade war with the US—which Europeans will understandably find hard to win—to shared security, the continent needs to change its direction fundamentally from seeking US compliance with the written and unwritten obligations of the transatlantic alliance to totally redefining—and changing—them.
This policy correction requires the EU to do a thorough reassessment of its ties not just with Washington but with Russia and China as well. It needs to reject notions—many of which were fanned out by the Biden administration most recently —of Russia being a security threat and/or Russian expansionism. Instead, it needs to realise that the Trump administration might be its best chance in the last seven decades or so since the end of the Second World War to come out of Washington’s shadow and become a truly autonomous player capable of both defining and defending its interests. In other words, instead of seeking to mend ties with the US to make them ‘normal’, it should further the ‘de-coupling’ and reinforce its continental interests as its own responsibility. There is arguably no alternative for Europe to survive this situation without losing its strength and standing internationally.
Obama Wants Filters Not Freedom
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | June 21, 2025
Barack Obama’s recent appearance at The Connecticut Forum once again revealed a troubling truth: the political establishment is becoming increasingly comfortable with the idea of government-managed speech.
In an extended conversation with historian Heather Cox Richardson, the former president signaled that his tolerance for open discourse ends where his ideological preferences begin.
Amid warnings about the spread of “propaganda” and falsehoods online, Obama floated the notion of imposing “government regulatory constraints” on digital platforms.
His rationale? To counter business models that, in his opinion, elevate “the most hateful voices or the most polarizing voices or the most dangerous, in the sense of inciting violence.”
But it doesn’t take much reading between the lines to see what’s really being proposed: a top-down mechanism to filter speech based on government-approved standards of truth.
This wasn’t framed as a direct assault on the First Amendment, of course. Obama was careful to qualify that such regulations would remain “consistent with the First Amendment.”
But that’s little comfort when the very premise involves the government determining which voices deserve a platform. Once the state takes a role in deciding what is true or acceptable, the line between moderation and censorship evaporates.
Obama’s remarks included a reference to a saying he alleges is attributed to Russian intelligence and later adopted by Steve Bannon: “You just have to flood the zone with so much poop…that at some point people don’t believe anything.”
This, he argued, is the tactic used by bad actors to disorient the public. What he failed to acknowledge is that the antidote to this isn’t more control, but more speech. Free people, given access to a full spectrum of views, are capable of discerning fact from fiction without government supervision.
The real danger isn’t “too much speech.” It’s the increasing desire to place speech under bureaucratic management.
Obama’s suggestion that some speech is too “hateful” or “dangerous” to be left unchecked invites a future where those in power decide what the public is allowed to hear, a vision completely incompatible with a free society.
And we’ve already seen how that plays out.
The Biden administration made repeated efforts to coerce tech companies into censoring dissenting views during the COVID-19 pandemic, flagging opinions that contradicted official narratives even when they later turned out to be correct.
The justification was always the same: protecting people from harm. But in practice, it meant silencing lawful speech and punishing disagreement.
Obama’s proposal echoes that same authoritarian instinct.
The promise of safeguarding the public from falsehoods is used to justify speech controls that would ultimately chill dissent and punish deviation from dominant narratives. And who decides which views are “too hateful” or “too polarizing”? Politicians? Bureaucrats? Tech executives? The moment that power is granted, it will inevitably be abused.
UK seeks to ban Palestine Action over RAF base protest
Al Mayadeen | June 21, 2025
British news outlets on Saturday revealed that the UK government is preparing to ban Palestine Action, a pro-Palestinian direct action group, by classifying it as a terrorist organization. This move, spearheaded by Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, is expected to be announced in a ministerial statement on Monday and will require parliamentary approval. If enacted, the ban would criminalize membership and support for the group under the Terrorism Act 2000.
The proposed proscription follows a high-profile protest at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire, where Palestine Action activists gained access to the military airbase and sprayed red paint on two aircraft. The group described the action as part of a campaign to disrupt the UK’s complicity in “Israel’s” assault on Gaza. “Activists have interrupted Britain’s direct participation in the commission of genocide and war crimes across the Middle East,” the group said.
Video footage released by the group showed two individuals entering the base at night on electric scooters, with one spraying red paint into the engine of a Voyager aircraft, used to transport British leaders and refuel allied jets. A spokesperson for the group declared: “Despite publicly condemning the Israeli government, Britain continues to send military cargo, fly spy planes over Gaza and refuel US and Israeli fighter jets.”
Though the RAF claimed the damage is being assessed and does not expect major operational disruptions, the incident has sparked a wider security review across UK military bases. The government’s response has drawn criticism for targeting activism rather than addressing its own military entanglements.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer condemned the protest as “disgraceful” and labeled it “an act of vandalism,” while counter-terrorism police and the Ministry of Defence continue their investigations.
Disruptive Solidarity
Founded in 2020 by Huda Ammori, a British-Palestinian activist, and Richard Barnard, Palestine Action is known for its non-violent yet disruptive tactics aimed at corporations that profit from the Israeli military-industrial complex.
The group has previously shut down two Elbit Systems-linked arms factories in Oldham and Tamworth and forced companies like Dean Group International to cut contracts with Israeli weapons manufacturers. Their disruptive tactics—ranging from factory occupations and sabotage to sustained divestment pressure, have challenged British institutions to reckon with their role in supplying the machinery of occupation.
Friday’s action at Brize Norton marks one of the group’s most significant actions yet, directly confronting a military base central to the UK’s support operations.
Critics say the proscription is a politically motivated attempt to silence dissent against Britain’s role in arming and supporting “Israel”. “We represent every person who stands for Palestinian liberation. If they want to ban us, they ban us all,” Palestine Action posted on X. The Palestine Solidarity Campaign called the move “outrageous,” defending the group as a non-violent direct action network.
The planned ban raises serious concerns about the criminalization of solidarity with Palestine and the suppression of dissent.
Israel security minister calls to arrest anyone who watches Al Jazeera channel
MEMO | June 20, 2025
Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir called Thursday for the arrest of anyone watching Al Jazeera TV channel which provides 24 hours coverage of the Israel-Iran conflict, claiming the network poses a “threat” to national security.
He also called to halt Al Jazeera’s broadcasts inside Israel.
Ben-Gvir said, “We will not allow Al Jazeera to broadcast from Israel. It endangers our national security”.
“I call on the public to report anyone who watches Al Jazeera”, said the far-right minister.
Israeli authorities have previously raided Al Jazeera’s offices several times and closed them down.
Estonia worsening anti-Russian measures
By Lucas Leiroz | June 20, 2025
The Baltic countries continue to escalate their anti-Russian measures, taking all sorts of irresponsible actions to harm Russian citizens both inside and outside their borders. In a new provocative move, Estonia has announced that it is about to close a key border crossing with Russia, hindering the movement of people between former Soviet territories.
Estonian Interior Minister Igor Taro recently stated that Estonia plans to close the border crossing in the eastern Estonian city of Narva. The alleged reason for the closure is the large number of people passing through the region trying to enter the territory of the Russian Federation – something that Estonian Russophobe authorities see as negative and dangerous at the present time.
Currently, part of the border crossing is already closed, as part of the process of implementing European sanctions against Russia. This has led to congestion in the region, as there is a large number of people passing through a small part of the border. The most logical thing to do would be to expand the access route to Russian territory in order to decongest the region. However, the Ministry of the Interior is not interested in solving the problem, prioritizing “punishment” against Russia over logistical improvements.
Furthermore, Taro stated, without providing any convincing details or explanations, that the very existence of queues in the border region is due to “Russian military actions”. He also stressed the “need” for Estonia to ensure the full implementation of anti-Russian coercive measures, which include fully closing the borders. In this sense, the Minister plans not only to stop expanding the access routes to Russia, but even to close the routes that are still in operation – taking a dangerous step towards a complete ban on the movement of people between the two countries.
“Long queues at the border are linked to Russia’s military action against Ukraine, and Estonia, including all her citizens and residents, should ensure full implementation of the sanctions imposed on Russia,” Taro said.
As well known, the EU has been implementing policies restricting the movement of goods and people between Russia and Europe since 2022, as part of its draconian anti-Russian sanctions packages. Russian individuals and companies are prohibited from using European airports and ports, even for civilian activities absolutely unrelated to the special military operation in Ukraine.
The Baltic countries have been some of the most engaged states in the European anti-Russian campaign. Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia have advanced measures to ban the Russian language and culture, as well as to erase the Soviet past and revise their history – absolving the Nazis and condemning the heroic role of the USSR in World War II. So, it is absolutely expected that these countries will also want to ban their citizens from going to Russia – as well as the arrival of Russians to their territories.
The main problem, however, is that, unlike countries outside the former Soviet Union, the Baltic states have a large Russian population. In Estonia, almost a fifth of the population are ethnic Russians. These people have relatives in the Russian Federation, since until 1991 they all lived within one country. Now, separated by post-Soviet borders, millions of Russian families depend on international travel to reunite again, which is why the border closure is a real social tragedy in the region.
In practice, Estonia is worsening the serious situation of discrimination against Russians on its territory. Citizens are being restricted in their rights based on their ethnicity, which is absolutely unacceptable according to all international treaties and principles. Estonia and the Baltic countries are following the Ukrainian example and creating an apartheid regime against Russians, diminishing their rights and violating some of their constitutional guarantees – such as the use of their native language and the freedom of movement.
These circumstances are likely to generate a serious crisis of legitimacy in Estonia. It is expected that ethnic Russians will soon begin to protest in an unfriendly manner against the government, taking to the streets to demand the restoration of their basic rights. Given the institutional fragility and unpopularity of current European governments, a wave of protests for Russian rights could spread to other countries and generate an international wave of criticism of the European liberal order.
Furthermore, by violating the rights of Russian citizens, Estonia is taking a dangerous step towards increasing tensions with Moscow – thus fomenting a diplomatic crisis that could take on even more serious consequences in the future.
Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert.
You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.
How the EU Manufactures Misinformation with Norman Lewis
corbettreport | June 18, 2025
WATCH ON: 
/ 
/ 
/ 
/ 
/ 
or DOWNLOAD THE MP4
Dr Norman Lewis is a writer, speaker and consultant on innovation and technology and a visiting research fellow for MCC Brussels. Today he joins us to discuss his new report, “Manufacturing Misinformation: The EU-funded propaganda war against free speech,” detailing how the European Commission is attempting to regulate the boundaries of legitimate public debate in Europe through a covert campaign of linguistic control and censorship.
SHOW NOTES:
Manufacturing Misinformation: The EU-funded propaganda war against free speech
IDF Mandates Pre-Approval for Reporting Missile Strikes, Including on Social Media and Online Platforms
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | June 18, 2025
A new set of censorship rules issued by the Israel Defense Forces is raising alarms over media freedom and public transparency.
Brigadier-General Kobi Mandelblit, Israel’s chief censor, declared on Wednesday a mandate requiring prior approval for any reporting on where missiles or drones have struck, no matter the platform or location of publication.
According to the statement, “any person who prints or publishes printed matter or a publication regarding the location of a strike or hit by enemy war materiel, including missiles of any kind and UAVs, in the media or online (including social media, blogs and chats, etc.)” must now submit that material to the military censor for approval before it is released.
This directive applies to both domestic and international reporting, online and offline.
Mandelblit emphasized that he is also banning “the printing or publishing of any publication that has not been submitted to the Censor, or which has been submitted to him and his instructions have yet to be received or have been received and not adhered to.”
Framing the move as a matter of national security, he stated that violating the order is “liable to severely harm the security of the state,” and warned that offenders will be charged, the Jerusalem Post reported.
The sweeping nature of the restrictions, especially in a digital era where information spreads rapidly across borders, places significant power in the hands of military authorities to control narratives and limit the public’s access to real-time facts.
The breadth of the order effectively criminalizes independent reporting on attacks unless pre-approved by the state.
Pentagon removes joint staff officer over anti-‘Israel’ posts
Al Mayadeen | June 18, 2025
The Pentagon has removed Colonel Nathan McCormack, a senior planner responsible for the Levant and Egypt region at the Joint Chiefs of Staff’s J5 planning directorate, from his position, pending an internal investigation into social media posts deemed anti-“Israel”.
The move follows a report by the Jewish News Syndicate (JNS), which pointed out that McCormack had operated a semi-anonymous public social media account containing posts critical of the Israeli occupation, including remarks about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and pro-“Israel” activism in the United States.
A Pentagon official told JNS that the Joint Staff is “aware of the situation” and has initiated a formal review.
“He will no longer be on the joint staff while the matter is being investigated,” the official stated. McCormack is being returned to his service branch, a step often taken when a service member is reassigned during a personnel inquiry.
The official added, “The information on the X account does not reflect the position of the Joint Staff or the Department of Defense.”
The case is indicative of the interplay between pro-“Israel” media outlets and decision-making circles in the US, where criticism of “Israel” or even Israeli officials is quickly silenced and censored.
Controversial posts draw scrutiny from defense officials
The social media account, which has since been disabled, reportedly contained archived posts referring to Netanyahu and his “Judeo-supremacist cronies,” as well as statements suggesting that US foreign policy has been compromised by unconditional support for the Israeli occupation.
Other posts questioned the loyalty of American pro-“Israel” advocates, claiming they prioritize support for “Israel” over US strategic interests.
A Defense Department contractor who interacted with McCormack told JNS that the posts were “dangerous” given the officer’s rank and influence.
“This is the kind of bitter oversharing I’d expect from someone who doesn’t know better,” the contractor said. “But at his level and under his own name and likeness? It’s mind-boggling.”
The Pentagon emphasized that McCormack’s personal commentary does not represent official policy. “Our global alliances and partnerships are vital to our national security, enhancing our collective defense, deterrence, and operational reach,” the official added.
An investigating officer has been assigned to review the material and determine whether McCormack violated military conduct or security policies.
Brussels warns Slovakia over constitutional change aimed at overriding EU law
By Thomas Brooke | Remix News | June 17, 2025
The European Commission has issued a warning to Slovakia, declaring that proposed constitutional changes backed by Prime Minister Robert Fico’s government would breach European Union law by attempting to deny the supremacy of EU rules over national legislation.
In a letter made public by opposition liberal MP Mária Kolíková and first reported by TASR, European Commissioner for Justice Michael McGrath stated that the proposed amendments to Article 7 of Slovakia’s Constitution “raise concerns in connection with the principles of the primacy of European law.”
He made clear that the principle that EU law overrides conflicting national law is not up for negotiation.
Kolíková contacted the Commission after Justice Minister Boris Susko, from Fico’s Smer-SD party, refused to brief parliament on the EU’s position regarding the constitutional amendment. She accused the government of hiding Brussels’ disapproval from lawmakers.
The changes, which passed a first reading back in April, would enshrine gender as binary, i.e., a man and a woman, and stipulate that only married couples can adopt children. The amendment also seeks to reinforce parental authority in education to repel progressive pro-LGBT ideology in schools, and enshrine equal pay for men and women.
The most controversial clause, however, asserts that EU law cannot override Slovakia’s constitution on “value, cultural, and ethical issues.”
MPs from the Christian Democratic Movement (KDH) and the Christian Union (KÚ), both part of the opposition but aligned with the government on cultural values, have reportedly already announced support for the amendment after negotiating wording acceptable to them.
Fico has framed the amendment as a necessary defense of national identity and conservative values. Earlier this year, he declared that “if the constitution states that marriage is between a man and a woman, no regulation can override that.”
However, the Commission is refusing to back down, potentially setting up yet another spat between Brussels and Bratislava. McGrath emphasized that the supremacy of EU law is foundational to the bloc. “The primacy of EU law is not open for debate,” he said.
Featured Video
Col Doug Macgregor: America’s Back to ENDLESS WARS
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu: Leave No Palestinian or Arab Alive
By Jonas E. Alexis | Veterans Today | July 23, 2017
Israeli Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu seems to have picked up where the late Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef left off. The Israeli army, Eliyahu said, must slaughter the Palestinians “and leave no one alive.” The Palestinians, the good rabbi continued, must be “destroyed and crushed in order to end violence.” Here is Eliyahu’s algorithm:
“If they don’t stop after we kill 100, then we must kill 1,000. And if they do not stop after 1,000, then we must kill 10,000. If they still don’t stop we must kill 100,000, even a million.”
There is more to this “logic” than meets the eye and ear. Eliyahu even postulated that the Israeli army ought not to get involved in arresting Palestinians because “If you leave him alive, there is a fear that he will be released and kill other people. We must eradicate this evil from within our midst.”
You may say that this is just an isolated case. No Israeli official believes that, right? … continue
Blog Roll
Recent Comments
Aletho News- French FM under fire over ‘false’ claims about UN rapporteur
- Israel Wants ISIS-Linked Militias To Control Rafah Crossing — The New Order in Gaza
- ISIS never left Syria, it just changed uniforms
- Why ARE the US and Israel Obsessed With Eliminating Iran’s Ballistic Missiles?
- Kremlin comments on EU ‘myopia’ over dialogue with Russia
- Russia more adapted to contemporary military technology than NATO
- Germany puts caveat on more missiles for Ukraine
- UK High Court rules Palestine Action ban unlawful
- Populations in key NATO nations balk at sacrifices for military spending – poll
- Ukraine to ban Russian literature – culture minister
- If Americans Knew
- Israel used weapons in Gaza that made thousands of Palestinians evaporate
- ADL’s Stats Twist Israel’s Critics Into Antisemites
- Why Is the World Silent When the Gaza Genocide Is Not Over?
- In Gaza: 8,000 bodies under rubble, 3,000 missing – Not a ceasefire Day 126
- AZAPAC, the new PAC opposing Israeli domination of U.S policies
- Haim Saban: Billionaire for Israel
- Rafah e-wallet plan highlights Israel’s deepening financial occupation
- Viral post claims Netanyahu sought legal approval, igniting speculation about Israel’s organ harvesting
- AIPAC Has a New Opponent: PAL PAC
- Right-Wing Catholic Off Trump Religion Panel After Israel-Gaza Remarks at Antisemitism Event
- No Tricks Zone
- German Gas Crisis…Chancellor Merz Allegedly Bans Gas Debate Ahead of Elections!
- Pollen Reconstructions Show The Last Glacial’s Warming Events Were Global, 10x Greater Than Modern
- Germany’s Natural Gas Storage Level Dwindles To Just 28%… Increasingly Critical
- New Study Rebuts The Assumption That Anthropogenic CO2 Molecules Have ‘Special’ Properties
- Climate Scientist Who Predicted End Of “Heavy Frost And Snow” Now Refuses Media Inquiries
- Polar Bear Numbers Rising And Health Improving In Areas With The Most Rapid Sea Ice Decline
- One Reason Only For Germany’s Heating Gas Crisis: Its Hardcore-Dumbass Energy Policy
- 130 Years Later: The CO2 Greenhouse Effect Is Still Only An Imaginary-World Thought Experiment
- New Study Affirms Rising CO2’s Greening Impact Across India – A Region With No Net Warming In 75 Years
- Germany’s Natural Gas Crisis Escalates … One Storage Site Near Empty …Government Silent
Aletho News 