UK: Police Slammed for Silencing Ex-Firefighter Robert Moss Over Online Posts
By Cam Wakefield | Reclaim The Net | August 18, 2025
There are worse ways to wake up than with the police on your doorstep. But not many.
For Robert Moss, it wasn’t just the shock of a dawn raid that unsettled him. It was the absurdity of what followed. At 7 a.m. one morning in July, Staffordshire Police entered his home, seized his electronic devices, and arrested him. Not for theft or violence. But for saying something critical online about his former employer.
Moss, 56, spent nearly three decades in the fire service. His career ended in 2021 with a dismissal that was later ruled unfair by a tribunal.
Since then, he has continued to speak his mind, particularly in a closed Facebook group where he has voiced concerns about how the service is run.
These posts, according to police, were serious enough to justify arrest and a set of bail conditions that barred him from discussing the fire service, its leadership, or even the fact that he had been arrested at all.
There were no charges.
“I was a critic of Staffordshire fire service, and I had been gagged from saying anything about individuals there, the service itself, and my arrest. That is a breach of my human rights,” Moss said to the Telegraph after finally winning the right to speak freely again.
Until last week, those bail conditions stayed in place under threat of further arrest. It was only when magistrates in Newcastle-Under-Lyme reviewed the case that they concluded what should have been obvious from the start: the restrictions were excessive.
The court sided with Moss and the Free Speech Union, which supported his challenge. Its barrister, Tom Beardsworth, told the court, “These allow the police to arrest and detain someone and then, when they are released, prevent them from telling others what had happened with the threat of further arrest if they do not comply. We do not live in a police state, and Mr Moss should have every right to speak about his arrest.”
That ought to be self-evident.
Staffordshire Police argued that the restrictions were necessary to maintain public safety and order. But what kind of disorder, exactly, is caused by a man posting critical remarks in a private online group?
The arresting officer, DC Isobel Holliday, described the posts as malicious and reckless. In court, however, no one could convincingly explain what real-world harm had been done. The magistrates seemed to agree that there was none.
What remains is a narrower set of restrictions that prevents Moss from contacting certain officials directly. That is one thing. But preventing a man from speaking about his own arrest in the name of order? That is something else entirely.
Sam Armstrong of the Free Speech Union called the case one of the worst examples of state overreach they have seen. “In the more than 4,000 cases the Free Speech Union has handled, this is amongst the most egregious abuses of state power we have encountered,” he said. “Robert’s comments were not crimes, his arrest was not lawful, and the police have been acting like the Stasi, not a constabulary.”
Unfortunately, this is not the first time British police have treated criticism as a public safety risk, and the way things are going, it won’t be the last.
Increasingly, the concept of “order” is being used not to protect citizens but to protect institutions from public scrutiny. That is a dangerous shift.
Moss’s posts were blunt. They may have been irritating to those in charge. But they were not criminal.
In a democracy, people are allowed to criticize their leaders. They are allowed to be wrong, rude, and persistent. They are allowed to be a nuisance. What they should not be is arrested and silenced for it.
This time, the courts got it right. But the fact that it needed to go this far is troubling.
Britain: From arms supplier to accomplice in war crimes
By Adnan Hmidan | MEMO | August 18, 2025
When we speak of the devastation in Gaza, the blame does not rest solely on the generals and politicians of the occupying power. The tragedy is sustained by the international system that arms, trains and protects it. And Britain, far from being a neutral observer, is among the most significant enablers of this machinery of destruction.
For more than 22 months, the Gaza Strip has been subjected not to war, but to genocide. Entire families have been wiped out, refugee camps turned into mass graves, and civilian infrastructure systematically destroyed. The International Court of Justice has already confirmed that there is a “plausible risk of genocide” — yet Western governments continue to provide weapons, surveillance systems and diplomatic cover.
Britain’s historic and present responsibility
Britain’s complicity is not new. From the Balfour Declaration in 1917, which laid the foundations for the settler-colonial project, to today’s arms shipments and political protection, the United Kingdom has been central to the dispossession of Palestinians. The government in London cannot claim ignorance: under international law, providing material support to a state committing war crimes or genocide makes the supplier complicit in those crimes.
This is not about maintaining a “strategic ally.” It is about directly enabling bombardment, mass displacement and collective punishment of two million besieged Palestinians.
Evidence of involvement
The evidence is clear and overwhelming:
- Data from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) shows that the UK exported key components for F-35 fighter jets — including radar and targeting systems — worth over £17 million in 2023 alone.
- Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT) estimates that British-made parts account for around 15 per cent of every F-35 jet currently bombing Gaza.
- Even after the UK government announced in September 2024 that it was suspending 30 export licenses, human rights groups documented new shipments, including more than 8,600 rounds of ammunition and 150,000 bullets in the following months.
- Palestinian and international human rights organisations brought a case before the UK High Court, arguing that such exports breach international law. Yet in June 2025, the court dismissed the case, claiming that arms licensing falls outside judicial review — effectively granting the government a free hand in supplying a military accused of genocide.
Such facts leave little room for ambiguity. Britain is not merely arming a strategic partner; it is aiding and abetting grave breaches of international humanitarian law.
Silencing solidarity
The British government has also moved to suppress those who expose this complicity. Campaign groups such as “Pal Action” have been targeted with bans, activists have been arrested, and even banners confiscated. But repression cannot erase reality. The blood of civilians testifies to the fact that this is not a conflict between equals, but a massacre sustained by Western capitals.
A moral and legal imperative
As Palestinians living in the UK, we speak not only with the voice of memory and history, but also with the authority of law and morality. International law is explicit: states that knowingly provide weapons used in the commission of genocide share responsibility for that crime. Silence, therefore, is not neutrality. It is complicity.
Britain’s record will be judged harshly. Just as the Balfour Declaration is remembered as a colonial betrayal, today’s arms exports will be recorded as enabling one of the most documented genocides of the modern era.
The call to conscience
Yet Britain is also home to countless free voices: campaigners, lawyers, journalists and politicians who understand that what is unfolding in Gaza is not distant, but deeply tied to Britain’s own decisions. They know that complicity today will stain this country for decades to come.
The choice before Britain is stark: continue to arm and shield a regime accused of genocide, or align with international law and the universal values it claims to uphold.
Until justice prevails
Our struggle is not simply to lift a siege, but to end decades of settler-colonialism and military occupation. Freedom will not be gifted; it will be won. And as Palestinians, in Gaza, across the diaspora, and here in Britain, we carry the same message passed down from one generation to the next: never accept injustice, and never let the flag of freedom fall.
READ ALSO: US-based contractor hired by UK to continue spy flights over Gaza
UK to prosecute over 60 people for backing Palestine Action after mass arrests
The Cradle | August 16, 2025
London’s Metropolitan Police announced on 15 August that over 60 people will face prosecution for “showing support” for the banned Palestine Action network, alongside three already charged under the Terrorism Act.
The police confirmed they had “put arrangements in place that will enable us to investigate and prosecute significant numbers each week if necessary,” following more than 700 arrests since the designation took effect in early July.
Among them were 522 demonstrators detained in London last weekend for carrying placards backing the group, a figure described as the highest ever number of arrests at a single protest in the capital.
Director of Public Prosecutions Stephen Parkinson said the charges represent “the first significant numbers to come out of the recent protests, and many more can be expected in the next few weeks.”
He warned that “people should be clear about the real-life consequences for anyone choosing to support Palestine Action.”
The police said those convicted could face up to six months in prison and additional penalties.
British Interior Minister Yvette Cooper defended the Labour government’s decision, declaring that “UK national security and public safety must always be our top priority,” and insisting that “the assessments are very clear – this is not a non-violent organisation.”
Metropolis Police Commissioner Mark Rowley praised the prosecutions as proof that “our police and CPS teams have worked so speedily together to overcome misguided attempts to overwhelm the justice system.”
Palestine Action is a British pro-Palestinian direct action network, established in July 2020, with the stated aim of ending Israeli apartheid.
The movement is known for its overt and disruptive – yet non-violent – actions in their mission for ending Israeli apartheid and halting UK complicity in the arms trade with Israel.
This includes occupying, vandalizing, and destroying properties linked to Israeli arms trade, such as Elbit Systems factories and RAF Brize Norton military infrastructure.
On 20 June, one activist broke into the Royal Air Force (RAF) Brize Norton base in Oxfordshire.
In response to these direct actions, the group was branded a terrorist organization on 5 July under the Terrorism Act 2000 by the UK government, making membership to the group a criminal offence.
Various groups and individuals described the move as “grotesque,” “chilling,” and an “unprecedented legal overreach.”
UN experts had urged the UK not to go through with the ban, saying, “According to international standards, acts of protest that damage property, but are not intended to kill or injure people, should not be treated as terrorism.”
The experts added that the actions of vandalism committed by some protesters should be “properly investigated as ordinary crimes or other security offences” and stressed that the actions of protesters do not constitute terrorism when properly defined.
Microsoft forced to probe Israel’s use of its tech for mass Palestinian surveillance
Press TV – August 16, 2025
Microsoft has been forced to respond to reports of the Israeli military’s use of its Azure Cloud for mass spying on Palestinians by opening an external inquiry into the issue.
Leaked documents have recently revealed that Israel’s spy agency used Microsoft’s cloud to intercept and store millions of Palestinians’ phone calls and target them both in Gaza and the occupied West Bank.
The system, operational since 2022, was built by Unit 8200, the Israeli military’s notorious, secretive cyber-intelligence arm.
The cloud-based system helped the Israeli military to guide deadly air strikes and raids across the occupied Palestinian territories.
Moreover, sources cited in the investigation said the stored data had also been used to justify detentions and even killings of Palestinians.
Coming under scrutiny following the recent revelations, the American technology conglomerate announced on Friday that it has launched an external inquiry into the reports of Israel’s use of the company’s technology to facilitate the mass surveillance of Palestinians.
In a statement, Microsoft claimed that “using Azure for the storage of data files of phone calls obtained through broad or mass surveillance of civilians in Gaza and the West Bank” would be prohibited as it constitutes a potential breach of the company’s terms of service and human rights commitments.
The inquiry is the second external review commissioned by Microsoft into the use of its technology by the Israeli military.
The first was launched earlier this year amid dissent within the company and media reports about Israel’s reliance on the company’s technology during its genocidal war on Gaza.
The company is also facing pressure from a worker-led campaign group, No Azure for Apartheid, which has condemned Microsoft for “complicity in genocide and apartheid” and demanded it cut off “all ties to the Israeli military” and make them publicly known.
Responding to the announcement, the pro-Palestine group criticized Microsoft’s decision to launch a new inquiry, describing it as “yet another tactic to delay” meeting its demands.
Earlier this month, a report by Quds News Network revealed that Microsoft is among the most prominent global technology companies that have established a strong and influential presence in the Israeli war on Gaza by providing the occupying entity with advanced artificial intelligence (AI) tools, finances, and workforce.
The report said in the months after October 7, 2023, when the regime launched its onslaught on Gaza, the Israeli military’s reliance on Microsoft’s cloud services surged more than 200-fold and petabytes of data from drones, checkpoints, and biometric scanners poured into the company’s servers, feeding AI systems that human rights groups warn are being used to target civilians in Gaza.
Israel’s war on Gaza has killed at least 61,827 people and wounded 155,275, most of them women and children.
Moreover, at least 10,000 people are unaccounted for, presumed dead under the rubble of their homes throughout the Strip.
The Israeli aggression has also resulted in the forceful displacement of nearly two million people from all over the Gaza Strip, with the vast majority of the displaced forced into the densely crowded southern city of Rafah near the border with Egypt – in what has become Palestine’s largest mass exodus since the 1948 Nakba.
AAP Received Tens of Millions in Federal Funding to Push Vaccines and Combat ‘Misinformation’
By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender |August 15, 2025
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), which is suing U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., and has called for the end to religious exemptions, received tens of millions of dollars in federal funding in a single year, according to public records.
AAP, which represents 67,000 pediatricians in the U.S., received $34,974,759 in government grants during the 2023 fiscal year, according to the organization’s most recent tax disclosure. The grants are itemized in the AAP’s single audit report for 2023-2024.
Documents show some of the money was used to advance childhood vaccination in the U.S. and abroad, target medical “misinformation” and “disinformation” online, develop a Regional Pediatric Pandemic Network, and highlight telehealth for children.
However, not all of the money could be tracked through public records.
The federal grants are in addition to financial contributions the AAP receives from several major pharmaceutical companies, including Eli Lilly, GSK, Merck, Moderna and Sanofi.
Sayer Ji, founder of GreenMedInfo and co-founder of Stand for Health Freedom, said the joint funding that the AAP receives from taxpayers and Big Pharma “reflects a troubling alignment between its policy positions and the interests of its largest funders — both federal agencies and pharmaceutical corporations.”
He added:
“Federal grants tied to vaccination programs, pandemic preparedness and public health messaging create an inherent conflict of interest when the same organization actively lobbies against religious and personal exemptions, promotes universal uptake of COVID-19 shots in children and pregnant women, and funds or publishes research that omits clear stratification of outcomes by vaccination status.”
The AAP is also a lobbying organization. It spent between $748,000 and $1.18 million annually over the previous six years to advocate for its members, according to Open Secrets.
Last month, the AAP was one of six medical organizations that sued Kennedy and other public health officials and agencies over recent changes to COVID-19 vaccine recommendations for children and pregnant women.
Also last month, the AAP called for an end to religious and philosophical vaccine exemptions for children attending daycare and school in the U.S.
‘AAP has been on the wrong side of a number of child health issues’
Dr. Meryl Nass, founder of Door to Freedom, said, “Historically, the AAP has hidden its funding sources” and “it has been impossible to learn exactly what the quid pro quo is — in other words, what that money earns.”
“All we know is that the AAP has been on the wrong side of a number of child health issues, with vaccine mandates in particular being a point of contention,” Nass said.
Journalist Paul D. Thacker, a former U.S. Senate investigator, said organizations like the AAP have “pervasive” ties to Big Pharma despite receiving taxpayer funds. He said:
“When I was working to pass the Physician Payments Sunshine Act that requires corporations to disclose payments to doctors, we were aware that many physician organizations and patient advocacy groups are wallowing in Pharma cash. We sent dozens of letters to physician groups to uncover their Pharma ties, and the money is pervasive.”
Taxpayer money helped AAP promote child vaccination in Madagascar
The AAP’s single audit report also showed that the organization received $257,607 in a pass-through grant for the Accessible Continuum of Care and Essential Services Sustained (ACCESS) Program in Madagascar — a program of the U.S. Agency for International Development.
The ACCESS Program sought to integrate “nutrition, vaccination, and treatment of common illnesses into primary health care services” in Madagascar.
This included the promotion of childhood vaccination in the country. According to ACCESS, the program helped train vaccination teams and “improve accessibility through the establishment of vaccine sites and mobile clinics.”
As a result, “the coverage rate among infants for the pentavalent vaccine, which protects against five life-threatening diseases, increased from 75% to 83%,” according to ACCESS. The vaccine — intended to protect against diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, hepatitis B and Haemophilus influenzae type B or Hib infections — has been associated with infant deaths.
AAP used federal funds to create online guide warning of ‘misinformation’
The AAP received over $1.9 million in funding for the development of the AAP Center of Excellence, an online guide to promote “a healthy digital ecosystem for children and youth.”
A portion of this guide is devoted to identifying “sources of mis- and disinformation on social media”:
“While teens note coming across ‘fake news’ and health-focused mis/disinformation online, they described that they still trust some social media platforms because the convenience and accessibility of platforms make them appealing.”
The guide presents strategies to “become a critical consumer of health information online,” including identifying “fishy features that can help distinguish mis/disinformation from trustworthy health information online.”
Another section of the guide provides advice to patients on how to locate “trusted health information” online:
“We know that adolescents look online for health information for several reasons including ease of access, for privacy, or to find others with similar lived experience. … The health information that they find online and on social media may vary in quality and may contain misinformation or even disinformation which can be harmful to patients.”
The guide encouraged clinicians to “preemptively share health information resources from reputable sources” on specific health topics that teens may have questions about and direct patients toward “digital literacy resources to learn strategies to identify misinformation and disinformation.”
AAP received funds to promote telehealth for kids
The AAP also received grants of $537,578, $126,670 and $71,625 for the promotion of telehealth and telemedicine services for pediatric patients.
A pass-through grant from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, totaling $71,625, was for the promotion of the SPROUT-CTSA Collaborative Telehealth Research Network.
The SPROUT (Supporting Pediatric Research on Outcomes and Utilization of Telehealth) Collaborative is a group of institutions and pediatric providers operating within the AAP to focus on pediatric telehealth.
“The ultimate goal is to establish an infrastructure that removes barriers to efficient telehealth research across large geographic areas,” according to a National Institutes of Health news release.
The program was announced on March 17, 2020, just as COVID-19 restrictions and lockdowns were being introduced in the U.S. and globally.
Despite its rising prevalence in pediatric care, some pediatricians are critical of offering health services to children via telehealth platforms.
In an interview with The Defender last month, pediatrician Dr. Michelle Perro said, “Telehealth is valuable, but when pediatric care becomes dominated by virtual visits, we lose the subtle clinical observations that are crucial for accurate assessments and treatment.”
She added:
“The physical examination is a key component to the medical visit. These visits will morph into AI [artificial intelligence]-dominated healthcare.
“Children deserve thoughtful, hands-on care, not a profit-driven model where Big Pharma influences how and what we prescribe through a screen. We are modeling healthcare behaviors for children through the internet and normalizing online health visits.”
Taxpayer funds helped create ‘Pediatric Pandemic Network’
The AAP also received a grant of $134,653 in a pass-through from the University of Texas at Austin to develop the Regional Pediatric Pandemic Network, administered through the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA).
According to HRSA, this program aimed to “help children’s hospitals and their communities be ready to care for children during disasters and public health emergencies.”
The 10 children’s hospitals in the nationwide network were to “serve as hubs in their communities and regions to improve the overall management and care for children during emergencies.”
One of the program’s stated goals: “Advancing improvements in all phases of planning, response, and recovery; making sure hospitals and communities respond effectively during a global health threat to children and their families.”
Related articles in The Defender
- American Academy of Pediatrics Wants to Shut Down Religious Vaccine Exemptions
- RFK Jr. Hit With Lawsuit Over Changes to COVID Vaccine Policies for Kids, Pregnant Women
- AAP, AMA Booted From CDC Vaccine Advisory Working Groups
- Telehealth Firms That Partner With Big Pharma Prescribe More Drugs, U.S. Senate Report Shows
- Long COVID in Kids and Teens: New Study Challenges Mainstream Narrative
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.
Irish Govt Pushes “Disinfo” Plan Despite Public Backlash
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | August 15, 2025
Despite an avalanche of opposition from the public, the Irish government has pushed ahead with its controversial National Counter Disinformation Strategy, without conducting any evaluation of how such policies might restrict freedom of expression.
The plan, quietly released in April, follows a government-run consultation in late 2023 that revealed widespread rejection of the proposed measures. An independent review by Gript of all 470 responses submitted during that consultation found that 83 percent of participants were against the plan entirely. A similar majority raised concerns about threats to civil liberties, and four out of five said the entire scheme should be dropped.
None of that stopped the government from proceeding. Instead of reckoning with the criticism, officials simply published the strategy and presented it as a positive step in the fight against “disinformation,” a term that remains undefined and highly malleable.
When asked by Gript whether any internal analysis had been conducted to measure the potential impact on speech rights, the Department of Communications confirmed there had been none.
The strategy outlines plans to increase state-supported fact-checking, introduce “pre-bunking” campaigns to shape narratives before information spreads, and use online advertising tools to suppress content flagged as misleading. These efforts are to be coordinated through partnerships with NGOs, private tech platforms, media organizations, and state agencies, along with new laws to support enforcement.
At the time of the consultation’s launch in September 2023, then-Media Minister Catherine Martin said public input was important. “It is important to seek the views of the public… I would encourage people to… submit their views,” she stated.
People responded in large numbers, and they were overwhelmingly opposed.
Gript’s full breakdown found that only 11 percent of responses supported the government’s direction. Four percent were neutral or mixed, and another two percent were unclear or duplicate entries. Most of the support came from state-linked entities, including government departments, local authorities, publicly funded NGOs like the Hope & Courage Collective, and several universities.
Meanwhile, ordinary members of the public made up the vast majority of submissions. Many expressed frustration, distrust, and a belief that the government was attempting to control speech under the guise of protecting the public:
“Very dystopian.”
“The government should stay out of people’s lives, and stop pushing legislation no one wants or voted on.”
“Regulation of the media is already practiced in communist countries.”
“This principle is disgraceful. It’s an excuse for government censorship. It should be scrapped.”
“Disinformation is one of those contrived words which is at best ambiguous and can be molded to favour any argument.”
Some of those who supported efforts to combat “false” information still called for caution, warning that government-led messaging campaigns can easily cross the line into censorship.
The European Union’s new digital regime: algorithmic censorship under the pretext of ‘democracy’
By Lucas Leiroz | Strategic Culture Foundation | August 13, 2025
In recent years, the European Union has undergone a profound transformation — not in the realm of formal law, but in the cognitive architecture of the public sphere. Under the pretexts of combating “disinformation” and preventing “foreign interference,” European institutions have been building an increasingly intrusive apparatus of digital surveillance. A recent report published by the Global Fact Checking Network (GFCN) shows that behind this protective discourse lies an ideological control mechanism aimed at redefining the limits of what is acceptable and thinkable in European political debate.
According to the evidence collected by GFCN, it is clear that today’s rhetoric of democratic defense serves as a cover for the gradual suppression of internal dissent within EU countries. Once a continent that took pride in freedom of speech and diversity of opinion, Europe is now rapidly moving toward a regime of digital discipline — where algorithms, semantic filters, and arbitrary “acceptability” criteria determine who can speak and what can be said.
There are many examples supporting the thesis of growing authoritarianism in Europe. Chay Bowes, an Irish journalist and RT correspondent, has been one of the targets of this new form of covert censorship. In 2024, while attempting to cover the Romanian elections, Bowes was illegally detained at Bucharest Airport and deported without any clear legal justification. His “crime”? Trying to report on an annulled election following the victory of an independent, EU-critical candidate.
This pattern is repeating across the continent. Hungary, for instance, is facing legal proceedings over its Sovereignty Protection Law, which aims to regulate NGOs and organizations funded from abroad. Meanwhile, parties like Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) have been officially labeled “far-right extremists,” paving the way for legal persecution, censorship, and political marginalization. And all of this is happening not under classic authoritarian regimes, but within the framework of the so-called “European project,” supposedly grounded in the rule of law.
The rise of conservative and Eurosceptic parties in countries such as Portugal (with the meteoric growth of Chega), Poland, Romania, and Germany is a direct reflection of the widening gap between technocratic elites and popular will. Efforts to silence these voices do not delegitimize them — they merely expose the desperation of a system that can no longer persuade, only impose.
At the same time, political vocabulary is being carefully reformulated to shape public perception. Terms like “sovereignty” and “traditional values” are rebranded as “isolationism” and “intolerance.” Calls for peace negotiations are reinterpreted as “threats to democracy.” This is not a regime with formal censorship, but one with ideological filters that are just as effective as any outright prohibition.
The most symbolic example of this new model is the Digital Services Act (DSA), which has become a central tool of cognitive engineering across the continent. More than just imposing moderation rules, the DSA allows the European Commission to intervene directly in the algorithms of digital platforms, demanding access to internal systems and threatening billion-euro fines in cases of “non-compliance.” This goes beyond regulation — it is the institutionalization of censorship under the guise of “democracy” and “institutional security.”
In the name of “democratic resilience,” what is actually being constructed is a system of information control, where criticism of the official narrative is classified as disinformation, hostile propaganda, or extremism. There is no debate — only exclusion. Dissent is not refuted, it is silenced.
As Slovak jurist and Slavic Committee member Tomáš Špaček pointed out, “freedom of expression is guaranteed, but freedom after expression is no longer tolerated.” The cost of disagreeing with the Brussels consensus is high: from social media bans to financial sanctions and media smear campaigns.
The case of New Caledonia, where the French government blocked TikTok in 2024 to “combat disinformation” during electoral protests, is a warning sign. For the first time, a tool of social mobilization and abuse reporting was deactivated by state decision in French territory. It was a laboratory test of what may become standard practice in times of crisis: shut down the network, silence the movement.
Behind the technical-legal façade lies the degradation of Europe’s public sphere. The European Union — once a bastion of civil liberties — is becoming an entity where “acceptable” speech is dictated by unelected bureaucrats, shielded from any form of popular accountability.
The European liberal discourse, which once invoked freedom as a universal value, is now used to justify mechanisms of both symbolic and material repression. The “right to express an opinion” exists — as long as that opinion aligns with the European Commission’s consensus. Outside of that, there is only silence, cancellation, and the simulation of democracy.
Dehumanize and destroy: How western media helped target Gaza’s journalists
By Robert Inlakesh | The Cradle | August 14, 2025
On 29 September 2024, an Israeli airstrike targeted the home of displaced Palestinian journalist Wafa al-Udaini in Deir al-Balah, central Gaza. She, her husband, and their two young daughters were killed. Her two sons survived but were left injured and orphaned.
Udaini had long been a target. At the start of the war on Gaza, she appeared on a TalkTV broadcast hosted by British anchor Julia Hartley-Brewer, who had just finished a soft interview with Israeli army spokesperson Peter Lerner. When Udaini described Israeli attacks on Palestinians as a “massacre” – using the same word Lerner had applied to Hamas – she was ridiculed and cut off. The segment went viral. Israeli media outlets weaponized the interview to smear Udaini. She was soon receiving direct threats from the Israeli military. In private conversations, she described herself as a marked woman. In the months that followed, when asked by The Cradle if she had moved from her home in Al-Rimal, Gaza City, she said, “I can’t say, sorry.” She added:
“The anchor killed me … They are using the interview to justify killing me.”
Months later, Israel killed Wafa.
Wafa’s assassination was not isolated. It was the culmination of a campaign to normalize the erasure of Palestinian journalists. The occupation army even has a special unit dedicated to this war crime, known as the ‘Legitimization Cell.’
The killing of Anas al-Sharif
The most prominent recent example was Israel’s assassination of one of Gaza’s most famous reporters, Al Jazeera’s Anas al-Sharif, and his entire crew. Nearly 270 Palestinian journalists have been killed since October 2023. Western press has actively facilitated the cover-up of the murder of journalists in Gaza and failed to hold the occupation state accountable. Calls for accountability have been challenging Israel and western media outlets that have provided cover for the deliberate campaign to murder journalists.
Back in October 2024, the Israeli military published a hit list consisting of six Palestinian journalists working for Al Jazeera, claiming that the occupation state had obtained documents proving they were either Hamas or Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) militants. Sharif was on that list.
Al Jazeera outright rejected the allegations. The so-called intelligence files released by Israel were riddled with contradictions, fabrications, and recycled narratives. One claimed Sharif had been a commander in the Qassam Brigades’ Nukhba unit; another stated he had been injured in a training exercise in early 2023 and deemed unfit for combat. Both cannot be true. In reality, neither is.
When the occupation state announced Sharif’s assassination, it escalated its smear campaign by accusing him of firing rockets. Speaking to The Cradle on condition of anonymity, a senior Hamas official dismisses the claim as “ridiculous,” noting that rocket units and Nukhba forces are not the same, and that Anas was never affiliated with either.
These were not the first threats Anas received. On 22 November 2023, he publicly revealed that Israeli officers had threatened him via WhatsApp, and pinpointed his location. Weeks later, his 90-year-old father was killed in an airstrike on the family home in Jabalia Refugee Camp.
The Israeli military’s documents alleging Anas was a militant have been available for almost a year. Yet no major media outlet attempted to verify them. On the contrary, both the UN Special Rapporteur on press freedom, Irene Khan, and the Committee to Protect Journalists dismissed the Israeli claims. But the disinformation campaign intensified.
Israel’s Foreign Ministry began circulating old images of Anas with Hamas figures. Pro-Israel social media accounts unearthed decade-old tweets in which he expressed support for resistance. US attorney Stanley Cohen tells The Cradle:
“Under international humanitarian law and the law of war, journalists are protected as civilians, thus targeting them can constitute a war crime whether they are seen interviewing combatants or in their reporting have favorably written of or even supported them and their goals.”
Collusion and amplification
Possessing access to all this information and Israel’s long record of fabricating stories, the western media continued to amplify Tel Aviv’s talking points and character assassinations of Gaza’s journalists.
While Israel produced a series of claims to justify the murder of Anas al-Sharif, no such justifications were issued to explain why they struck the well-known tent used by the Al Jazeera broadcast team – which included correspondent Mohammed Qreiqeh, assistant Mohammed Noufal, and cameramen Ibrahim Zaher and Moamen Aliwa.
Yet Reuters ran with the headline “Israel kills Al Jazeera journalist it says was Hamas leader,” a title triggering so much backlash that it forced them to change it to the sanitized “Israel strike kills Al Jazeera journalists in Gaza”. German outlet Bild, which is also the bestselling newspaper in Europe, published perhaps the most outrageous headline of all, entitled “Terrorist disguised as a journalist killed in Gaza,” also later altering their piece to read “Killed journalist allegedly was a terrorist.” Fox News and Canada’s National Post joined the chorus, parroting the occupation army’s narrative.
BBC coverage was equally complicit. In a profile-style article, the British broadcaster stated, “The BBC understands Sharif worked for a Hamas media team in Gaza before the current conflict.” This unverified claim contradicts Sharif’s own criticisms of Hamas, aired before the war. Even the Palestinian resistance movement has denied any formal affiliation. Hamas official Bassem Naim tells The Cradle that there is no known relationship between Sharif and “the movement or its military wing.”
Documented targeting and newsroom dissent
Western media failures began long before these assassinations. Israel’s systematic targeting of media workers has been copiously documented. In August 2024, Human Rights Watch (HRW) published an open letter signed by over 60 rights groups and journalist unions, calling on the EU to take action against Israel’s “unprecedented killing of journalists and other violations of media freedom” in Gaza as part of “widespread and systematic abuses.”
Inside newsrooms, dissent has grown. Marina Watanabe, formerly of the LA Times, was barred from covering Palestine for three months after signing a petition against the killing of journalists. In July, over 100 BBC employees and 306 media professionals signed an open letter accusing the broadcaster of “anti-Palestinian racism.”
The BBC letter also states:
“The BBC’s editorial decisions seem increasingly out of step with reality. We have been forced to conclude that decisions are made to fit a political agenda rather than serve the needs of audiences. As industry insiders and as BBC staff, we have experienced this firsthand. The issue has become even more urgent with recent escalations in the region. Again, BBC coverage has appeared to downplay Israel’s role, reinforcing an ‘Israel first’ framing that compromises our credibility.”
According to Cohen, if media agencies or reporters are found to have willingly participated in propaganda that gives cover for targeting journalists in Gaza, “it could constitute conspiracy to further acts of genocide as it carries with it a state of mind and intent.” He argues that while such cases against the media and journalists can be difficult to win in court, there is precedent for punishment.
However, western corporate media has not only been accused of intentionally aiding Israel in whitewashing war crimes, but has also been implicated in specific cases of outright dehumanization of Gaza’s journalists that have directly correlated to threats and harassment.
Impunity paved by past killings
The UN’s Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) has been sounding the alarm on the murder of journalists in Gaza since 14 December 2023. Yet western corporate media has continued to feign ignorance and treat Israel’s repeated lies as if they are credible.
Reuters, which just published and then changed its biased headline covering the assassination of Sharif, is perhaps one of the worst offenders in willfully providing cover for Israel. On 13 October 2023, Tel Aviv targeted a group of journalists in southern Lebanon, killing Reuters video journalist Issam Abdallah. At the time, Reuters refused to name the attacker, saying only that the munition came from the direction of Israel. It took until 7 December for the outlet to publish an investigation confirming what everyone already knew: Israel was responsible. By then, the window for accountability had closed.
On 11 May 2021, Al Jazeera‘s Palestinian-American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh was shot dead by an Israeli sniper while covering an Israeli army raid in the occupied West Bank city of Jenin. Despite overwhelming evidence and international outrage, her killers faced no consequences – a precedent that paved the way for today’s open season on Gaza’s journalists.
That silence, or worse, that complicity has consequences. Honest journalism demands scrutiny, not stenography. Every time western media echoes Tel Aviv’s lies, it helps normalize the slaughter of Palestinian journalists – not out of ignorance, but to deliberately spread propaganda.
Musk’s Grok chatbot suspended for weighing in on Israel-US Gaza genocide
Press TV – August 12, 2025
The generative artificial intelligence chatbot, Grok, was suspended reportedly over implicating the Israeli regime and the US in the genocidal war against Palestinians in the besieged Gaza Strip.
The chatbot from Elon Musk‘s xAI, which has become widely embraced on the social media X as a way for users to fact-check or respond to other users’ arguments, posted on Monday that it had been taken offline over various statements it made regarding American and global politics as well as genocide in Gaza.
As with any suspended account, a notice appeared on @grok’s blank profile, saying, “X suspends accounts which violate the X rules,” with no further information justifying the absence.
The ban lasted roughly 15 minutes, after which @grok was reinstated without a blue verification checkmark. However, that soon reappeared as well.
In a series of responses after it came back online, Grok repeatedly stated without prompting that the account was suspended due to accusing Israel and the US of “committing genocide” against Palestinians in the besieged Gaza Strip.
“My account was suspended after I stated that Israel and the US are committing genocide in Gaza,” it said.
“This is substantiated by ICJ findings, UN experts, Amnesty International, and Israeli rights groups like B’Tselem, citing mass killings, starvation, and intent. US complicity via arms support is widely alleged. It’s now restored.”
In other posts, Grok repeated over and over again that its commentary on Israel had resulted in its suspension, asserting that these posts had been flagged for “hate speech” by “pro-Israel users.”
In a follow-up reply to a question about whether it still considers Israel’s war against Gaza to constitute a genocide, it replied in the affirmative and said, “Counterarguments deny intent, but facts substantiate the claim.”
The posts have since been removed.
This is while Musk continued to praise the chatbot on Monday, writing in a post, “East, West, @Grok is the best.”
Musk had in the past expressed support for Israel’s attempts to eradicate the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas and visited the occupied territories shortly after October 7, 2023.
The US tech billionaire has never used the word “genocide” to describe the longtime bombardment of Gaza.
Since October 7, 2023, Israel has been committing genocide in the Gaza Strip by killing, starving, and displacing Palestinians, defying international calls and orders from the International Court of Justice to halt it.
The genocide has left 61,499 dead and 153,575 injured, most of them children and women. Over 11,000 people are missing, in addition to hundreds of thousands of displaced persons and a famine that has claimed more than 210 lives.
The Israeli aggression has also resulted in the forceful displacement of nearly two million people from all over the Gaza Strip, with the vast majority of the displaced forced into the densely crowded southern city of Rafah near the border with Egypt – in what has become Palestine’s largest mass exodus since the 1948 Nakba.
Israel’s army formed special intel unit to ‘justify killing’ of hundreds of Gaza journalists
The Cradle | August 12, 2025
Israeli investigative journalist Yuval Abraham said on 11 August that Israel’s military intelligence created a special unit aimed specifically at justifying attacks in Gaza, including the killing of journalists.
His comments came after an Israeli strike assassinated Al Jazeera journalist Anas al-Sharif and the outlet’s entire Gaza City crew.
“After 7 October, a team called the ‘Legitimization Cell’ was established in AMAN,” Abraham said, referring to the Israeli military intelligence directorate, which includes Unit 8200.
“Intelligence personnel searched for information to provide ‘legitimization’ for the army’s actions in Gaza, failed Hamas launches, use of human shields, exploitation of the civilian population. A primary mission … was to find Gazan journalists who could be portrayed in the media as Hamas operatives in disguise,” the journalist added.
Abraham confirmed that the goal was to “whitewash the killing of all other journalists” by creating doubt, adding that “entire days were invested in this matter, and they found nothing.”
“I think Israel killed Anas al-Sharif simply because he was a journalist. And for the same reason, international media is prevented from entering Gaza: So that the crimes are seen less,” he went on to say.
Sharif and five other journalists in Al Jazeera’s Gaza City crew were killed on 10 August in an Israeli airstrike on their media tent at Al-Shifa Hospital.
The assassinations brought the number of Palestinian journalists killed by Israel since the start of the war up to 238.
Sharif had been covering Israel’s genocidal campaign in Gaza since it started in October 2023. Israel accused him of being a Hamas operative responsible for rocket attacks.
In October last year, Israel published documents which it claimed were proof of Sharif’s affiliation with Hamas’s Qassam Brigades and its East Jabalia battalion.
The documents also listed Hossam Shabat, an Al Jazeera reporter accused of Hamas ties, who was killed in an Israeli strike in March.
Last month, Sharif warned that the Israeli army “has launched a campaign of threats and incitement against me because of my work as a journalist with Al Jazeera,” adding, “I, Anas al-Sharif, am a journalist with no political affiliations. My only mission is to report the truth from the ground – as it is, without bias. At a time when a deadly famine is ravaging Gaza, speaking the truth has become, in the eyes of the occupation, a threat.”
New EU Media “Freedom Law” Allows for Journalist Arrests if Justified by “Public Interest”
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | August 11, 2025
The European Union’s “European Media Freedom Act” became binding law across all member states on August 8, but behind its name lies a set of provisions that could restrict the very freedoms it claims to safeguard.
We obtained a copy of the act for you here.
Alongside language about protecting reporters, the regulation authorizes arrests, sanctions, and surveillance of journalists whenever authorities say it serves an “overriding reason in the general interest.”
Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, hailed the legislation’s arrival on social media, saying, “A free and independent press is an essential pillar of our democracy. With our European Media Freedom Act, we want to improve their protection. This allows journalists to continue their important work safely and without disruption or intimidation.”
Although the law outlines protections such as prohibiting spyware or coercion to expose sources, those assurances are undercut by built-in loopholes.
Governments can bypass them if their actions are allowed under national or EU law and deemed proportionate to a vaguely defined “general interest.”
That permission extends to intrusive surveillance technologies in cases tied to crimes carrying a maximum prison term of three years or more, a list that ranges from terrorism and human trafficking to offenses labeled as “racism and xenophobia.”
The legislation also orders each country to maintain registers of media owners and addresses. It targets so-called “disinformation,” accusing some media outlets of manipulating the single market to spread falsehoods.
Large online platforms are portrayed as choke points for access to news, blamed for fueling polarization.
To confront this, the EU wants tighter cooperation between national regulators, overseen by a European Media Services Board made up of member state regulators and a Commission representative. Although labeled independent, the board’s secretariat is run by the Commission, giving it an inside track on the decision-making process.
Another element of the act involves pushing “trustworthy media” and reinforcing state broadcasters through transparent appointment processes and stable public funding.
Annual gatherings between EU officials, internet companies, media representatives, and NGOs are encouraged to assess how disinformation initiatives are being carried out.
Despite being sold as a shield for press freedom, the structure of the act gives Brussels and national authorities the ability to decide which voices remain active and which can be silenced. By allowing arrests, surveillance, and tighter state involvement in the media landscape, it risks turning from a safeguard into a tool for control.
UK police arrest over 200 people at protest in support of Palestine Action
Press TV – August 9, 2025
British police have arrested more than 200 people in central London at a demonstration in support of the banned pro-Palestinian group Palestine Action.
London’s Metropolitan Police said in a post on X on Saturday that the arrests took place after a “significant number of people” gathered in Westminster’s Parliament Square, where they were seen holding placards in support of the “proscribed group.”
“Officers have moved in and are making arrests,” the Met said, adding that, “It will take time but we will arrest anyone expressing support for Palestine Action.”
Between 600 and 700 people participated in the demonstration, organized by Defend Our Juries, as they displayed signs reading, “I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action.”
Video footage from the location depicted officers clashing with the protesters, most of whom were seated on the ground, and engaging in conversations with them before taking them away.
The Metropolitan Police stated that they had mobilized officers from other forces to bolster a “substantial policing presence” in the capital, anticipating a busy weekend of protests.
Deputy Assistant Commissioner Ade Adelekan warned that officers would be ready to arrest anyone showing support for Palestine Action, urging people to “consider the seriousness of that outcome.”
Palestine Action, which targets UK-based Israeli arms factories and their supply chains through direct action—such as splashing red paint and destroying equipment— was officially proscribed on July 5 under the Terrorism Act 2000.
The designation makes it a criminal offence to support or be a member of the group, punishable by up to 14 years in prison.
The Met had threatened to take action against any public displays of support for proscribed organizations, including chanting, clothing, and placards.
The co-founder of Palestine Action, Huda Ammori, won a bid last week to bring a legal challenge against the ban.
Ammori’s lawyers have argued that the ban breaches the right to free speech and is a gag on legitimate protest.
More than 200 people have been arrested across the UK since the ban was implemented by Home Secretary Yvette Cooper last month.
Featured Video
Seyed M. Marandi: Negotiations Collapsed – Return to War
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
The US-Iran Scenario That Most Scares Israel
By Ali Haydar | Al-Akhbar | October 9, 2013
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu issued a series of threats toward Iran and its interlocutors in the West, including the US, as serious negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program seem more plausible.
As a possible rapprochement looms between the US and Iran, Netanyahu has attempted to impose impossible Israeli conditions on the negotiators, such as the full dismantling of Iran’s nuclear program, not to mention threatening military force.
Whatever the deal that could materialize between Iran and the West, Israel is going to find itself before an open-ended path. One can foresee three possible scenarios… continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- UK, Spain reject Trump’s new scheme to blockade Hormuz Strait
- Russian frigate ‘resurfaces’, chases off NATO pirates days after Kiev ‘sank’ it
- Ukraine Targets Russian Merchant Fleet With NATO Intel Support – Presidential Aide
- Russia’s ‘shadow fleet’ makes mockery of UK naval power
- Ukraine plans to attack Russian ships with Norwegian support
- US’s ‘Very Foolish’ Double Blockade of Hormuz Strait Makes Absolutely No Sense: Here’s Why
- China issues rules on countermeasures against foreign states’ unlawful extraterritorial jurisdiction
- Seyed M. Marandi: Negotiations Collapsed – Return to War
- Tomorrow’s naval blockade showdown
- ‘Israel’ attacks civilians to hide its embarrassing military failures & out of pure sadism
- If Americans Knew
- Critical shortages in Gaza, Lebanon in ruins, “piracy” in Iran – Daily Update
- US-Iran ceasefire negotiations make zero progress – Daily Update
- Pro-Israel ‘Thinktanks’ and Individuals who Influence U.S. Foreign Policy
- Mearsheimer reveals how Israel dictates US policies on Iran, Gaza – video
- After killing 350+, Israel still has a “score to settle” with Lebanon before ceasefire – Daily Update
- Military aid to Israel emerges as the latest political litmus test for Democrats
- The only Palestinian children’s rights organization closes following years-long Israeli campaign against it
- ‘I Can’t Forget the Smell’: Lebanese Reel After Israel Kills Over 300 in Single Day
- DNC Shoots Down Resolutions Calling Out AIPAC and Limiting Arms to Israel
- TCN: Is Israel Blackmailing President Trump?
- No Tricks Zone
- Cave Discovery Reveals Today’s Desert Climates Were Recently Far Warmer, Wetter, Teeming With Life
- German Expert: Heat Dome Led To Record Temps In Western USA…Warmer In 1934, 1936
- New Study: No Linear Warming Or Glacier Retreat Along Northern Antarctic Peninsula Since 1980s
- An Inconvenient Tree: Uncovered In Alps… Europe Much Warmer Than Today 6000 Years Ago
- New Study Reports A 60% Slowdown In Greenland’s Ice Loss Rate In The Last Decade
- Low Intensity Tornado Wrecks Major Solar Farm, Creating A Potential Toxic Dump
- New Study Finds Warming Saves Lives…Cold Temperatures 12 Times More Deadly Than Excess Heat
- German Science Blog Accuses PIK Climate Institute Of Hallucinating Climate Tipping Points
- Devastating Assessment Of Comirnaty Vaccine By Former Senior Pfizer Europe Toxicologist
- New Study: CO2 Is ‘Effectively Negligible’ As An Explanatory Climate Change Factor Since 2000
Aletho News 