Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Ro Khanna says Israeli settlers held US delegation in West Bank

Al Mayadeen | July 11, 2026

US Democratic Representative Ro Khanna said armed Israeli settlers prevented his delegation from leaving a Palestinian area in the occupied West Bank, an incident he said exposed the realities of Israeli occupation and settler violence.

Khanna, who is considering seeking the Democratic presidential nomination in 2028, told Reuters that settlers carrying US-manufactured M4 rifles surrounded the group’s vehicle on Wednesday near Khirbet Zanuta in the southern West Bank.

The California congressman had been touring the remains of a Palestinian community whose residents were driven out following repeated attacks by Israeli settlers.

“We were at a village that Israeli settlers had destroyed, they had destroyed the school, they had destroyed that village, and we were just looking at it,” Khanna said.

“And these hoodlums come in with machine guns – M4, an American-made machine gun – and they detain us. They block off the road. And then they call the IDF and the IDF is on their side, not on the side of the Americans,” he added.

Cameron Kasky, an aide traveling with Khanna, said the delegation remained blocked for more than an hour and contacted the US Embassy in al-Quds seeking assistance. Police officers later arrived and cleared the way for the group to leave, according to Kasky.

The Israeli military acknowledged that settlers had obstructed vehicles near Khirbet Zanuta, saying troops and police were dispatched after receiving a report from the area.

“Upon their arrival, the troops dispersed the Israeli civilians and allowed the vehicles to continue on their way,” the military said.

West Bank trip shapes possible 2028 bid

Khanna’s visit comes as divisions over US support for “Israel” deepen inside the Democratic Party, particularly amid the ongoing genocide in Gaza and escalating settler attacks across the occupied West Bank.

He is the second possible Democratic presidential contender to visit the region this week. Former White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel said during a visit to Tel Aviv that Israeli policies toward Palestinians were weakening public support for the US-Israeli alliance.

Asked whether he intended to seek the presidency in 2028, Khanna said, “I’m strongly considering it and I’m more resolved to consider it after this trip.”

The lawmaker chose not to visit Israeli officials during the trip, instead taking part in a Palestinian-led program focused solely on the occupied West Bank.

Khanna said the decision was intended to provide a direct view of the consequences of the occupation without the tightly managed itinerary often arranged for visiting US politicians.

“If you’re unwilling to speak up for Palestinian human rights, if you’re unwilling to speak up against the genocide in Gaza, the apartheid in the West Bank, then you are morally compromised,” Khanna said.

From the outskirts of Turmus Ayya, a Palestinian town where many residents hold US citizenship, Khanna also criticized senior figures within his party for failing to understand the political significance of Palestine among Democratic voters.

He said the Democratic establishment was “clueless about how much of a moral test Palestine, Gaza and Israel have become.”

Democratic support for ‘Israel’ declines

Public backing for “Israel” among Democratic voters has fallen considerably in recent years. A Reuters/Ipsos poll cited in the report found that its favorability rating among Democrats dropped from 59% in 2018 to 22% in May.

The shift has begun influencing Democratic primary races, with several lawmakers facing challenges over their support for the Israeli regime and Washington’s continued military assistance.

A growing number of Democratic members of Congress have called for restrictions or an end to US weapons transfers to “Israel,” which receives approximately $3.8 billion in annual American military aid.

That support includes funding for firearms such as M4 rifles, as well as missile interception systems used by the Israeli occupation during its war on Iran.

US-supplied weaponry involved in armed settler violence

Khanna’s comments drew a direct connection between US-supplied weaponry and armed settler violence in the West Bank, where Palestinians are subjected to attacks, forced displacement, land seizures and restrictions on movement.

Approximately three million Palestinians live in the occupied West Bank alongside around 500,000 Israeli settlers.

The United Nations and most governments consider Israeli settlements illegal under international law, particularly under provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention prohibiting an occupying power from transferring its civilian population into occupied territory.

The Israeli government rejects that position and describes the West Bank as disputed land, while Palestinians regard the territory, together with the Gaza Strip and occupied eastern al-Quds, as part of their future state.

Khanna’s trip signals that opposition to Washington’s unconditional support for “Israel” could become a central issue in the Democratic presidential contest ahead of 2028.

July 11, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Comments Off on Ro Khanna says Israeli settlers held US delegation in West Bank

Somaliland jails musician without trial over al-Quds song

Al Mayadeen| July 11, 2026

Security forces in the breakaway region of Somaliland have detained young musician Khalid Mohamud Abdillahi, widely known as Khalid Kamil, after he recorded a song about occupied al-Quds, Hiiraan Online reported, citing his family.

Kamil has been held without trial for the past two weeks, his brother, Abdimajid Mohamud Abdillahi, said Thursday.

Abdimajid said intelligence officers arrested the musician at his home in Hargeisa before transferring him to the Criminal Investigation Department. He said Kamil was later moved to the central prison.

“They arrested Khalid at his home,” Abdimajid said. “The intelligence accused him of singing a song about Jerusalem that he had not yet released.”

Family questions basis for arrest

Abdimajid said authorities informed the family that Kamil was being detained because of the song but maintained that its content was unrelated to Somaliland.

“The security services told us that Khalid was being held for a song, but since the song was not about Somaliland, but about Jerusalem, we saw that someone was pushing or behind the arrest,” Abdimajid stressed.

Opposition party condemns detention

Somaliland’s opposition KAAH party denounced the arrest on Thursday, describing it as an infringement on fundamental freedoms and part of a broader campaign to suppress criticism of the breakaway government’s policy toward “Israel”.

“The arrest of artists, journalists and citizens for expressing their views and creativity undermines the fundamental freedoms guaranteed by the constitution,” the party said.

KAAH urged the government to release Kamil immediately and halt intimidation targeting artists and members of the creative community.

The party added that democratic governance should be grounded in respect for the rule of law and freedom of expression rather than arrests and repression.

Previous arrests linked to ‘Israel’ recognition debate

Somaliland has previously detained religious leaders, traditional elders, journalists, and youth activists who opposed the prospect of Israeli recognition of Somaliland. Several of those detained were later released without trial.

The song, which has not been officially released but has circulated on social media, praises occupied al-Quds and highlights the city’s religious importance.

According to Kamil’s brother, the lyrics include lines stating that al-Quds “has been stolen” and criticizing those who remain silent about this crime.

Arrest follows opening of ‘Somaliland mission’ in al-Quds

The detention comes after Somaliland opened a diplomatic mission in occupied al-Quds in June, six months after “Israel” reportedly recognized Somaliland as an “independent state”.

The mission, located in a technology hub in the western part of occupied al-Quds, was inaugurated during an official visit by the regional president of the breakaway region of Somaliland, Abdirahman Mohamed Abdillahi, to “Israel”.

During the visit, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said there was a “deep spiritual connection” between the two sides.

Somalia’s federal government, which regards Somaliland as part of its territory, condemned the engagement with “Israel” and said any contact with the separatist administration violated Somalia’s sovereignty.

Somaliland declared independence from Somalia in 1991 but has not secured broad international recognition. Somalia continues to maintain that Somaliland remains part of the Federal Republic of Somalia.

July 11, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , , | Comments Off on Somaliland jails musician without trial over al-Quds song

Dressen v. Flaherty: Vaccine Censorship Case Goes to Appeal

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | July 10, 2026

Federal officials set out to erase the online voices of Americans who said Covid vaccines had hurt them. A new appeal asks the Fifth Circuit to give those Americans their day in court.

The New Civil Liberties Alliance filed its opening brief on July 7, asking the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to revive Dressen v. Flaherty.

We obtained a copy of the brief for you here

A federal judge in Texas had thrown the case out before a single document changed hands in discovery. The suit accuses the Biden administration of running a joint government and private censorship operation against people who went online to talk about vaccine injuries.

Brianne Dressen alleges she was injured after she volunteered for an AstraZeneca vaccine trial. Shaun Barcavage, Kristi Dobbs, Nikki Holland, and Suzanna Newell each reportedly suffered serious, debilitating injuries after Covid vaccination. Ernest Ramirez was vaccinated without incident and then lost his healthy 16-year-old son five days after the boy received his first Pfizer dose. The autopsy pointed to an enlarged heart and myocarditis.

They did what people in pain tend to do. They went to social media to trade medical research, look for treatments, share hopeful stories, and find others who understood. For many of them, closed online support groups became a lifeline.

The government treated that lifeline as a threat. The Surgeon General’s Office, the CDC, HHS, DHS, CISA, and the White House leaned on social media companies to flag this speech as “misinformation,” shadow-ban it, or delete it outright.

The operation reached across agencies and into the platforms themselves, coercing and colluding with the companies that decide who gets to be heard.

Stanford supplied the machinery. The now-defunct Stanford Internet Observatory and its “Virality Project” tracked posts and handed the platforms lists of speech to suppress.

The Virality Project targeted Covid-vaccine speech that broke from the administration’s preferred policies, whether or not that speech was accurate. Real accounts of real injuries got flagged because they were inconvenient, not because they were false.

The censors were specific about their targets. Their tracking called out Bri Dressen by name. A woman reportedly injured in a vaccine trial, describing what happened to her own body, became something a federal effort wanted the public not to see.

None of that was enough for the US District Court for the Southern District of Texas, which dismissed the case at the pleading stage. The plaintiffs had laid out a detailed factual account of a nationwide censorship conspiracy, and the court closed the door before discovery could begin.

NCLA’s brief says the district court got the law wrong in several ways. The judge set too narrow and exacting a bar on personal jurisdiction and used it to wave off the Stanford defendants and the individual government officials.

The court also misread the Supreme Court’s decision in Murthy v. Missouri, which weighed whether a different set of NCLA clients had shown enough to win a preliminary injunction. No injunction is being sought here, so that higher standard does not govern this case.

The brief argues, the court made a further error on the civil-rights conspiracy claim. It tossed the plaintiffs’ claim under 42 U.S. Code Section 1985(3) on the theory that they had not alleged racial discrimination. The statute never mentions race. It protects “any person or class of persons” stripped of their rights through an invidiously discriminatory conspiracy, and the Supreme Court has said the provision can reach non-racial classes.

“To call what happened to our clients ‘troubling’ is a massive understatement. After suffering devastating medical injuries following Covid vaccination, they turned to social media as a lifeline for support and connection with others who understood. Rather than compassion or aid, the Government responded with relentless censorship, maligning them as liars and conspiracy theorists and cutting off the lifelines that they depended on.

“Their only offense was that their lived experiences, pain, and even private conversations in online support groups contradicted the Administration’s preferred Covid-vaccine narrative. The cruelty and injustice are difficult to overstate,” said Casey Norman, Litigation Counsel at NCLA.

The appeal also presses a point the district court skipped over. Censorship harms more than the person silenced.

“We are confident the Fifth Circuit will correct the District Court’s numerous errors in dismissing the complaint, which included taking an inappropriately narrow view of personal jurisdiction and ignoring that not just speakers, but also potential listeners, suffer harm resulting from unlawful government censorship,” said Caitlin Moyna, Senior Litigation Counsel at NCLA.

The stakes reach past these six plaintiffs. If courts keep reading Murthy as a wall against every censorship suit, the government gains a template for silencing people with almost no risk of accountability.

“Lower courts are misapplying the Supreme Court’s Murthy v. Missouri decision, and the ruling below here is a prime example. The Murthy decision set a high bar for standing in the context of a preliminary injunction to stop future censorship. But no PI was sought here, so the Murthy standard is not applicable. If Bri Dressen cannot satisfy standing—when the defendants called her out by name in their censorship tracking—then no one will,” said Mark Chenoweth, President and Chief Legal Officer of NCLA.

According to NCLA, the campaign still burdens its clients’ ability to speak, to associate privately, and to exchange information with others in closed support groups.

The question in front of the Fifth Circuit is whether Americans silenced by their own government can even make their case to a jury, or whether the courthouse door stays shut before anyone looks at the evidence.

July 11, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Comments Off on Dressen v. Flaherty: Vaccine Censorship Case Goes to Appeal

RT producer speaks out after UK detention

James Scott said the authorities questioned him for 2.5 hours, seized his devices, and are still investigating him

RT | July 9, 2026

An RT employee was detained and interrogated after arriving in the UK from Russia several days ago under the country’s counterterrorism laws.

James Scott said he traveled to Manchester to visit friends and family and watch World Cup matches when he was stopped by the border authorities and questioned for two and a half hours.

Speaking publicly for the first time after leaving the UK, Scott said the authorities seized his electronic devices, returning them several days later, and that he remains under investigation, which he called “ridiculous” and “absurd.”

Scott is the second RT journalist to be detained by the British authorities. Last year, Steve Sweeney, the head of RT’s Lebanon bureau, was briefly detained by counterterrorism officers at London Heathrow Airport and extensively questioned about his work for the Russian broadcaster.

July 9, 2026 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia, Video | | Comments Off on RT producer speaks out after UK detention

Doctor faces up to 50-year jail sentence — Is it because he promoted monoclonal antibodies instead of COVID vaccines?

By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | July 7, 2026

In 2021, Dr. Ron Elfenbein, a physician who operated FirstCall Medical Center in Maryland, went on Fox News to criticize the Biden administration’s policies limiting access to monoclonal antibodies. Speaking during the COVID-19 vaccine rollout, Elfenbein insisted that monoclonal antibodies were effective in treating COVID-19.

Four months later, the federal government indicted Elfenbein on five counts of fraudulent coding and billing at his clinics, alleging that Elfenbein “upcoded” by billing for a higher level of treatment than provided.

But Elfenbein said he believes the charges were motivated by his support for monoclonal antibodies — and a federal judge agreed.

In August 2023, a jury found Elfenbein guilty. But in response to Elfenbein’s motion for acquittal, U.S. District Judge James K. Bredar threw out the jury’s verdict and acquitted Elfenbein in December 2023.

In his 93-page ruling, Bredar said the government did not present enough evidence to convict Elfenbein, instead relying on “loose definitions” and an “imperfect” set of standards governing medical coding.

“The evidence weighs so heavily in favor of the defendant that it would be unjust to enter judgment against him,” Bredar wrote.

“That kind of post-verdict acquittal is extraordinarily rare,” said Dr. Kirk Moore, a Utah plastic surgeon who last year was acquitted on federal charges that he issued falsified COVID-19 vaccination cards. “Judges almost never overturn juries. Bredar did it because the case was just that empty.”

Yet, in the final days of the Biden administration, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) appealed. In July 2025, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that the original jury had enough evidence to convict Elfenbein and sent the case back to the trial court.

“The government doesn’t get to lose, apparently,” Moore said. “They just get to keep swinging, bullying their way through a judicial system that is now built for this exact purpose.”

In December 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court denied Elfenbein’s appeal.

In an interview with The Defender, Elfenbein said that his new trial is scheduled for January 2027. He believes he is unfairly being targeted as a “whistleblower” who was trying to help the public during a global pandemic and who was charged despite a lack of evidence against him.

He faces up to 50 years in prison if convicted on all five charges.

Steve Kirsch, founder of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation, said the case against Elfenbein is “inexplicable” and that there were no coding errors or any criminal intent.

“Nobody was harmed. No patient was harmed. No insurance company was harmed. The federal government was harmed,” Kirsch said — because promoting monoclonal antibodies undermined the government’s promotion of COVID-19 vaccines.

Government’s case ‘the height of bureaucratic arrogance’

According to Elfenbein, his network of clinics rapidly expanded operations early during the COVID-19 pandemic in response to “unprecedented” circumstances.

“No one really understood what to do. Everything was sort of ‘fly by the seat of your pants.’ So, we had to invent everything,” Elfenbein said. He cited the example of drive-up COVID-19 testing with provider evaluation, which he said his clinics were the first to offer in Maryland.

“At one point, we were seeing over 1,000 patients a day across six different or eight different sites. And we had to figure out how to accommodate that,” Elfenbein said.

Elfenbein said that at his drive-up testing sites and in his urgent care facilities, patients would communicate with practitioners virtually through a television screen and microphone. Their results would then be delivered electronically.

In 2021, Elfenbein began offering monoclonal antibodies to COVID-19 patients. At the request of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, he set up a monoclonal antibody clinic at FedEx Field outside of Washington, D.C.

In an April interview with The MAHA Report, Elfenbein said the clinics performed 5,000 infusions.

Monoclonal antibodies are produced in labs and designed to replicate the immune system’s response to pathogens. Elfenbein said the treatments — and his test-and-treat model, where patients would be tested and treated at the same site — were successful and became “the model for the entire country moving forward.”

“It was like battlefield medicine, just trying to improvise and do as much as you can and as much good as you can in as little amount of time as possible,” Elfenbein said.

Elfenbein said that despite their success in treating COVID-19 patients, the Biden administration significantly curtailed the use of monoclonal antibodies in December 2021, making it much more difficult for practitioners in certain states to obtain the treatment.

That same month, Elfenbein told Fox News that people were “going to die” as a result of not having access to monoclonal antibodies. He made similar remarks in an interview with Newsmax during this period.

“It’s just the height of bureaucratic arrogance, and it’s … horrible,” Elfenbein told Fox News at the time.

The ‘government’s looking to put me in jail for 50 years … over $250’

Four months later, in April 2022, Elfenbein was out with his son when he received a phone call from his clinic, informing him that two federal agents wanted to speak with him. He later learned that the DOJ planned to indict him on healthcare fraud charges.

While the circumstances of his indictment were initially unclear, Elfenbein said he learned during the pre-trial discovery phase that undercover agents posing as patients had visited his testing facilities after his Fox News interview.

The DOJ alleged that, in the case of five patients who visited Elfenbein’s testing facilities, insurers were charged more than they should have been for the level of treatment provided, as a result of “upcoding.”

According to Elfenbein, there are “four different codes you can pick from when you’re doing evaluation and management” of a patient, ranging from level 2 to level 5. “Normally, in most cases, you should get a bell curve” among the different levels, Elfenbein said. But during the pandemic, this changed.

“There’s a pandemic going on. We’re not seeing ankle sprains. We’re not seeing elbow sprains. We’re not seeing lacerations. We’re seeing COVID and that was it.”

Most COVID-19 patients were coded as level-4 patients, which he said was the norm across medical facilities during that time.

According to Healthcare Law Insights, the codes are imprecise, which “makes for difficult federal prosecutions.”

“There is purpose in [the] codes’ imprecision in that it allows physicians flexibility to exercise their best judgment given the multitude of factors that go into medical decision-making,” Healthcare Law Insights reported.

In the case of Elfenbein, the initial judge found a lack of evidence that Elfenbein’s level-4 coding was “objectively false.”

In an amicus brief filed on Elfenbein’s behalf in October 2024, the American Medical Association (AMA) agreed, writing, “Clinicians must be able to exercise their judgment without fear of inadvertently facing allegations of wrongdoing.”

Elfenbein said this is significant because the AMA developed the ICD-10 medical coding system that’s currently in use.

Elfenbein said:

“The American Medical Association owns that. Everybody uses ICD-10. And, by the way, there are over 69,000 possible codes in ICD-10. And the government alleged we chose the wrong code out of 69,000, five charts out of over 100,000, in the timeframe of the indictment during a global pandemic.”

Elfenbein said prosecutors couldn’t identify which code should have been assigned to those five patients instead of level 4, but that the difference between level 4 and level 3 amounts to approximately $50.

“The government’s looking to put me in jail for 50 years, destroy my life, take away my livelihood, over $250,” Elfenbein said.

“The … definitions for level-4 evaluation and management codes are inherently subjective — they depend on ‘medical decision-making’ complexity, not a stopwatch,” Moore said. “If you’re going to charge a man with fraud for using the wrong code, you should probably be able to say what the right code is. They couldn’t, wouldn’t and ultimately, didn’t.”

‘This is a case of shoot first and ask questions later’

Elfenbein told The Defender that while he does not have hard evidence proving that the DOJ’s case against him is retaliatory, the timing of his indictment shortly after his Fox News and Newsmax interviews is likely not coincidental.

“Temporally, I went on Fox News, and I got indicted almost to the day, four months later. Putting the two things together, it seems to make sense in my mind that this is what set them off,” Elfenbein said.

He suggested that the government’s case against him appeared to have been hastily constructed, further suggesting that the DOJ was targeting him on retaliatory grounds rather than on the strength of the evidence.

“They indicted me before they had the [patients’] charts. They didn’t even know what was in the charts,” Elfenbein said. Federal investigators did not speak to his business partners, who were responsible for billing, and never cross-examined a professional medical coder.

According to Elfenbein, the government’s own witnesses also undermined the DOJ’s case during the first trial. While prosecutors alleged that the five visits in question were too quick for the number of procedures that were coded, a government witness testified that “time is irrelevant for coding” and that the tests were “medically necessary.”

“This was a case where even the chief judge said, ‘This is a case of shoot first and ask questions later.’ No real investigation had been done,” Elfenbein said. “That’s pretty telling, for a federal judge to say that to the prosecution.”

Promotion of a non-vaccine treatment ‘posed a huge threat’

Elfenbein said he believes his public statements about the effectiveness of monoclonal antibodies threatened the COVID-19 vaccine enterprise.

The COVID-19 shots were issued under emergency use authorization, which is customarily revoked once other effective treatments are identified and licensed.

Elfenbein said his clinics had become the largest supplier of monoclonal antibodies in the mid-Atlantic region, which “posed a huge threat.”

“It was a direct threat to the emergency use authorization of the vaccine,” he said. “I think I was the easiest fall guy … I was out all the time beating the drum, answering phone calls, talking to people, answering Facebook messages, taking questions, anything I could do to help.”

Moore agreed. “The monoclonal antibody ban was transparently about clearing the field for the vaccines. If there’s an effective early treatment available, the urgency to get jabbed drops considerably.”

By making monoclonal antibodies available despite government efforts to curtail their use, and by subsequently criticizing the government on that front, Elfenbein said he, in effect, became a whistleblower.

“I went on Fox News and I said, ‘The government doesn’t know what it’s doing, and it is gonna kill people.’ If that’s not a whistleblower, I don’t know what is.”


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.

July 8, 2026 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Comments Off on Doctor faces up to 50-year jail sentence — Is it because he promoted monoclonal antibodies instead of COVID vaccines?

The end of anonymity in a state-verified internet

As governments tie online speech to real-world identities under the banner of child safety, the implications extend much farther

By Onur Ozersin | The Cradle | July 8, 2026

The internet, long framed as a space of relative freedom, is entering a period of structural change driven by governments acting in parallel.

A quieter process is underway across multiple jurisdictions. Authorities are introducing identity verification requirements tied to access and participation. These measures are presented as safeguards for minors, and a number have already been written into law.

From Canberra to Washington, London to Ankara and Abu Dhabi, governments are moving to dismantle the era of anonymous internet access, embedding age restrictions and verification protocols into law and platform design in what amounts to one of the most significant shifts the digital world has seen since its inception.

A coordinated turn

The emerging model links user profiles to verified identities, going beyond routine regulation and altering how expression functions online.

As every digital post becomes indelibly linked to a real-world identity and added to a permanent database, the concept of online privacy is fundamentally inverted. Anonymity is no longer viewed as a civil right, but rather as an illicit activity.

Momentum accelerated in the UK in 2025, where more than 12,000 individuals faced detention and penalties linked to online activity.

A similar trend is unfolding in the US, where states such as Florida, Utah, and California have pushed forward with localized identity mandates. Progress on a federal equivalent, the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), remains under congressional debate.

The EU has moved along a parallel track through the Digital Services Act (DSA). Presented as a regulatory framework, it has taken on an enforcement function in practice. Denmark, Greece, Italy, and Spain have been selected as early testing grounds for verification systems.

By 2026, the focus had begun to widen. The debate moved from child protection toward the regulation of political expression. In Germany, Chancellor Friedrich Merz stated in early May, “I want to see the real names of everyone who expresses an opinion against us online. They should not hide behind anonymous accounts.”

Turkiye introduced comparable measures in late April. Parliament approved identity checks and a social media ban for children under 15. Following publication on 1 May, platforms were given nine months to comply.

Justice Minister Akin Gurlek described the internet as “digital chaos” and said the law would apply to platforms with more than one million users. Penalties for non-compliance include aggressive enforcement actions, such as financial sanctions, bandwidth throttling, and total network blocking.

The UAE adopted its own framework in June 2026 through Cabinet Decision No. 106. It set an official age threshold for social media use in the Arab world. Platforms are required to integrate with UAE Pass or deploy biometric verification systems. A 12-month transition period has been granted, with enforcement measures including fines and possible service suspension beginning July 2027.

While neighboring Gulf states have not yet codified specific age restrictions or identity verification mandates, parallel legislative frameworks are highly anticipated. This is particularly true for countries boasting advanced digitalization infrastructures, such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

Regulators are also cracking down on the primary tool used to bypass these digital borders: VPN services. European Commission Vice President Henna Virkkunen warned that identity verification measures must not be circumvented via VPNs, aligned with existing plans in France and the UK to restrict private network routing.

This crackdown marks a dramatic ideological reversal. Where European leaders previously criticized China’s rigorous internet restrictions under the banner of free speech, they are now deploying the very same enforcement mechanisms within their own borders.

Verification as a condition of access

Several proposals would require users to confirm their identity within fixed timeframes, in some cases as short as 72 hours. Failure to comply could result in account suspension and deletion of associated data.

The choice is reduced to two options. Users either attach their digital history to their legal identity or lose access to accumulated networks and content.

This requirement effectively weaponizes your entire digital past. A political argument you had years ago, an obscure question asked on an old forum, or a reckless comment made in the heat of youth will now follow you forever, indelibly stamped onto your official legal identity.

Initially restricted to government agencies, this searchable database could eventually be accessed by insurance corporations and future employers. Cross-border data sharing will likely become standard practice during international travel applications.

A possible scenario illustrates the trajectory. A visa application could include a request for a digital profile from a country of origin. Automated systems would assess that data before any human review.

The EU has already imposed sanctions on journalists covering certain geopolitical issues, including those expressing pro-Palestine views or positions aligned with Russian policy.

The scope of regulation is not limited to public content. The EU has continued to pursue its “Chat Control” initiative, which aims to enable scanning of private communications. After a temporary exemption expired in April 2026, the Council moved on 2 July to restore monitoring provisions through 2028.

This issue has prompted intense resistance from privacy advocates and a coalition of over 500 cryptographers, who warn that requiring platforms to pre-scan message content inherently compromises end-to-end encryption, effectively transforming private messaging spaces into permanently monitored state domains.

Speech under observation

Officials maintain that these measures apply to social media. The infrastructure being built has broader potential applications.

It is only a matter of time before fingerprint, retina, and facial scans become mandatory for every single action you take online.

Once that threshold is crossed, background screening will extend far beyond traditional criminal records; instead, an individual’s digital profile will become the primary determinant of their professional career. This shift seamlessly enables AI algorithms to scan every digital trace left online, pre-emptively labeling users as “risky” or “prone to crime.”

This framework inevitably chills public discourse; criticizing state policy, exposing corruption, or merely asking a question will be permanently appended to a citizen’s digital dossier. Consequently, state authorities will no longer need to actively suppress free speech.

When the penalty for dissent risks the destruction of an individual’s lifelong professional achievements, self-censorship manifests organically.

A comparable pattern is visible offline. More than 300 international students involved in pro-Palestine protests at US universities faced visa revocations and deportation last year. If visible protest carries such outcomes, the implications of permanent digital traceability are likely to be more far-reaching.

Speaking to The Cradle, journalist and technology policy expert Fusun Nebil frames the issue in broader terms:

“Perhaps the most critical point in this debate is that the internet is no longer merely a means of communication; it has also become people’s digital memory and identity. It is not enough for governments to cite seemingly legitimate justifications such as child safety, combating disinformation, and fighting cybercrime. We must seriously discuss how a digital order that completely eliminates anonymity will exert pressure on freedom of expression, political pluralism, and the culture of social criticism in the long term.”

From open forum to managed space

The internet has long functioned as a space where citizens learn and shape ideas through open discussion, progressing from early forum sites to modern social networks. However, under a system where every word becomes an official record, the survival of satire, humor, and intellectual exchange is thrown into question.

In a framework where a joke cracked at age 22 can be held up as evidence against an individual at age 40, the internet will cease to be an environment for exploration and instead transform into a vast courtroom where any spoken word can be leveraged as an indictment.

Today, traditional media such as newspapers and television channels are frequently controlled or influenced by powerful interest groups in many countries. As a result, social media platforms have become the primary spaces where citizens can freely exchange ideas.

However, introducing mandatory identity verification will almost certainly restrict the diversity of opinions in these remaining open environments.

In June 2026, the UK government launched a consultation on regulating content distribution on platforms such as YouTube and TikTok. The proposals include requirements for algorithms to prioritize material from designated public service broadcasters and approved outlets.

This introduces a tiered structure within platforms. Certain sources receive visibility by design.

Exit routes and unintended outcomes

Mandating online identity verification could not only alter the nature of social media platforms, but also spark a mass exodus to the dark web. Ironically, the primary victims of this shift will be the very children these laws are intended to protect.

When governments force tech giants like Meta, X, and TikTok to implement identity checks, ordinary citizens who value privacy and young people in particular may turn to the dark web. Although mainstream platforms face frequent criticism, their moderation teams and AI systems actively remove the vast majority of harmful content.

In contrast, dark web networks lack any oversight or community guidelines. When a teenager uses the Tor network to bypass restrictions, they would not just be chatting with friends; they would enter an unmonitored environment where exploitation risks are exponentially higher than on monitored platforms.

Data concentration and exposure

The accumulation of identity data introduces another layer of risk. Large databases of biometric and personal information present attractive targets for cyberattacks.

In April 2026, concerns surfaced around the EU Age Verification App shortly after its code was made public. Security researchers identified weaknesses in its structure.

Independent specialists, including cybersecurity consultant Paul Moore and French cryptographer Olivier Blazy, immediately identified critical architectural and design vulnerabilities within the framework.

Addressing EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen directly on X, Moore issued a stark warning: “Seriously @vonderleyen – this product will be the catalyst for an enormous breach at some point. It’s just a matter of time.”

Telegram founder Pavel Durov also joined the debate, claiming that these security vulnerabilities are a direct result of the system’s fundamental design rather than a simple error: “The EU age verification app was hackable by design – it trusted the device (that’s instant game over).”

A monitored horizon

Although identity verification on the internet may seem like a step taken to protect children, whether it leads to a safe harbor or a dangerous cliff depends on how it is implemented. If the solution is based solely on enacting bans and collecting ID numbers, free communication will inevitably be pushed toward dark web networks where oversight is almost impossible.

The path to protecting children is not to lock digital doors and hand the keys over to the government. Rather, it lies in ensuring that the open internet continues to provide a space where citizens can freely express ideas without the pressure of self-censorship, while making it safe through moderation, education, and transparency.

Otherwise, by the 2030s, we may find ourselves facing not a generation protected from the harmful effects of the internet, but a generation that has grown up in the lawlessness of the dark web.

July 8, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , , , | Comments Off on The end of anonymity in a state-verified internet

And if political Cancel Culture fails?

What will Europe become if the populist sweep occurs across Europe?

Ashes of Pompeii | July 8, 2026

A couple of days ago I wrote about political Cancel Culture in Europe, how the establishment is using lawfare to try to sideline populist movements, usually right wing, across the continent. And from their perspective, it is not hard to understand why. Without cancelling these opposition groups, there seems little doubt that almost all of the establishment parties will be swept away and in a very short time, the political landscape of Europe will look radically different.

The sheer scale of this potential electoral shift means that the traditional mechanisms of political control will simply cease to function. Germany would see the AfD as either the by far largest party or actually forming the government. The UK would see Farage and Reform achieving a near absolute majority, fundamentally altering the British political system. France would face elections where the runoff is between Le Pen and Mélenchon, with both being complete outsiders loathed by the establishment for entirely opposite reasons. Spain would probably see a coalition between the right and the far right. Unlike other European countries, the Spanish right is not entirely uncomfortable with the far right, as many will have had family members who were entirely in synch with the National Catholic fascism of the past. Italy presents a fascinating case. Meloni came in as a far right outsider but adapted to become more centrist. It seems not unlikely that she will go back to her roots if all of her European peers more closely resemble where she came from than where she is now.

This sweeping transformation forces us to ask profound questions about the future of the continent. What does this mean for the EU project itself? Can a union built on ever closer integration survive when its largest members are led by sovereignists? What happens to Ursula von der Leyen personally and politically in such a scenario? Will she be forced out by a hostile council, or will she attempt to pivot her own agenda to survive? How will the European Commission function without its traditional center left/center right driving force? Will the entire bureaucratic apparatus in Brussels, itself built on this centrist tradition, face a complete dismantling?

We must also consider foreign policy and defense. What happens to the practically unified European support for Ukraine when the political winds shift so dramatically across the continent? How does this impact the cohesion and future of NATO? What becomes of the traditional EU north and south relations, or the dynamic with eastern Europe? How exactly do Hungary and Slovakia fit into this new paradigm? Do they transition from isolated outliers to the new ideological center of gravity? Will the Baltic states find themselves isolated in their hardline defense postures?

Furthermore, we must examine other continental relationships. What happens to relations with Russia and European energy security? Is Russia even interested in returning to basing much of its trade on Europe – once burnt, twice shy?

And of course, America. Many of these leaders are very pro-American, have good relations with Trump and are ideologically aligned. But how well will European sovereignty movements mesh with MAGA and America First? One thing is to be ideologically aligned, another very different thing is economic and military negotiations, and national interests.

On the domestic front, the cultural battles will undoubtedly intensify. How far would these outsiders go in dismantling wokist policies such as LGBT mandates and aggressive climate change legislation? Will they simply pause these initiatives or completely reverse decades of legislation? What happens to immigration rules and the millions of migrants already on the continent? Will mass deportations become a realistic policy goal?

It will not be surprising to see a certain amount of taming of the firebrands, just as we witnessed with Meloni before she fully embraced her current centrist posture. Governing requires compromise, and the responsibilities of state often moderate radical rhetoric. But if all of them are outsiders simultaneously, taming becomes much more difficult. There is no moderate center left to anchor them. Who would in this case do the taming?

When the core nations of Europe are all led by anti-establishment figures, the gravitational pull toward traditional compromise simply vanishes. The firebrands would have absolutely no reason to yield ground to a center that no longer holds power. Voters will demand immediate and radical changes, and leaders will have no institutional excuses to delay. The resulting political environment will be entirely uncharted territory for modern Europe.

The old consensus is dead. And either the traditional forces use authoritarian and lawfare means to maintain control, or a new, highly unpredictable era of nationalist governance is about to begin across the continent.

Of course the irony, and hypocrisy, of the political establishment’s use of authoritarianism to push back what they consider (or at least want us to consider) the “barbarian authoritarianists” will not be lost on all.

July 8, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Comments Off on And if political Cancel Culture fails?

Laura Loomer wants Max Blumenthal stripped of citizenship and raided by the FBI for reporting in Iran

By Justin K.P. | The Dissident | July 7, 2026

Laura Loomer, the unhinged Zionist commentator with the Trump White House’s ear, continues her attempt to use lawfare to silence reporters and commentators opposed to the American/Zionist war on Iran.

Anti-War journalist Max Blumenthal, the editor of The Grayzone, is currently on the ground reporting on the funeral for slain Iranian supreme leader Ali Khamenei.

For daring to report on this important historical moment, the unhinged Zionist commentator, Laura Loomer called for Blumenthal- an American citizen- to lose his citizenship and be raided by the FBI for the crime of doing journalism.

On X, Loomer disturbingly wrote :

Max Blumenthal You’re a shill for Islam and communism and I hope you’re raided in a heavily armed raid by the FBI at 5 am and that SecRubio strips you of your passport for aiding the Iranian regime as they chant Death to America.

I hope SecScottBessent investigates how you paid for your trip to Iran, or if it was given to you by Iran and IRGC supporters so you are charged and prosecuted for possible sanctions violations.

Loomer tagged the FBI, Marco Rubio, and Scott Bessent in the post, in an obvious attempt to get a bogus lawfare investigation launched against Max Blumenthal because he gave a voice to the millions of Iranians who came out in defiance of the U.S/Israeli war of aggression.

This is far from the first time Loomer has attempted to get the Trump White House to crack down on critics of the war in Iran.

Previously, Loomer spearheaded a campaign to get the co-founder of the anti-war, realist think tank Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, Trita Parsi, deported from the country for his opposition to the war in Iran.

Loomer, on X, made similar threats against Parsi, saying he “should be deported next” and directly telling him that “your days in our country are numbered”.

On X, Loomer wrote :

Secretary Rubio

Just so you know, Trita Parsi is also a Green Card holder.

He holds citizenship in Iran and Sweden.

Trita Parsi is a mouthpiece for the Iranian Regime and has used NIAC and the Quincy Institute to push out pro-Iranian regime talking points.

He should be deported next.

He is truly a threat to US National Security.

After the Israel lobby successfully primaried the anti-war Kentucky representative Thomas Massie, Loomer posted a picture with him next to Trita Parsi and wrote:

Hey Trita Parsi ,

Your boy Thomas Massie is about to be removed from Congress, and then…you’re probably going to be deported back to Iran.

Tick tock.

Your days in our country are numbered.

Loomer’s disturbing threats were following by an article from the Zionist propaganda blog, The Free Press, which falsely claimed that “In the eyes of some inside the Trump administration, Parsi isn’t just another Washington pundit eager to share his point of view. The State Department has launched an investigation of Parsi and could try to deport him, according to U.S. officials and documents reviewed by The Free Press.”

The State Department later clarified that “The State Department has no plans to revoke the green card of Mr. Parsi at this time”, but Trita Parsi said he believed that “some elements within the State Department wanted to start one and thought external pressure could help move things forward” following the threats from Loomer.

Before her attempt to deport Trita Parsi, Laura Loomer successfully got two Iranian women opposed to the U.S/Israeli war on Iran detained by ICE over false claims that they were related to the late Iranian general Qasem Soleimani.

Loomer boasted on social media , “Following my report and follow up with the US State Department in which I exposed the fact that Qasem Soleimani’s Niece Hamideh Soleimani Afshar has been living in the United States (Los Angeles, California) where she posts pro-Iranian regime and pro-IRGC content on her social media while she lives a life of luxury, the US State Department and SecRubio have just revoked her green card and she has been picked up by ICE. She has been arrested and will be deported back to Iran.”

ICE also detained her daughter, Sarina Hosseiny.

But as journalists Ryan Grim and Murtaza Hussain revealed , the two women had no connection to Qasem Soleimani.

They documented:

A review of personal documentation undercuts the allegation of a personal connection to Soleimani. Birth certificates from Iran, collected by the family, lay out a documented family tree spanning multiple generations with no connection to Qassem Soleimani, or even to relatives of the late general. Drop Site also reviewed other personal identification documents, including passports, family photographs, and work documentation from both Iran and the U.S. that strongly contradict the allegations that the two women were connected to the late Iranian military commander, or living lavishly from any connection to the Iranian government.

In order for Qasem Soleimani to be Hamideh’s uncle, based on her last name, he would need to be the brother of Hamideh’s father, Ali Soleimani-Afshar, who was born in Tehran in 1947. Yet according to the documents, Soleimani-Afshar had no brothers at all and his father died in the early 50s. Gen. Soleimani was born years later—in 1957—in a small village in the southern province of Kerman. Ali Soleimani-Afshar’s parents died in his childhood. Historical passport documents also show that Soleimani-Afshar’s family origins go back generations to the city of Yazd in central Iran, a province away from the roots of Gen. Soleimani.

The late general is also known to have two brothers, Sohrab and Hossein, who have previously given interviews about their upbringing in rural Kerman that identify themselves as his only brothers and make no mention of a connection to Ali Soleimani-Afshar.

Qassem Soleimani’s own family in Iran issued numerous strident denials that they had any relation to the late general. Soleimani’s youngest daughter, Zeinab Soleimani, a well-known political figure inside Iran, said in Iranian media that the State Department’s allegations were ‘false’ and that ‘the individuals arrested in the United States have no connection whatsoever to our family.’ Another daughter, Narjes Soleimani, went further in a separate statement, adding that, ‘To this day, no member of the Soleimani family, nor any relative of General Soleimani, has resided in the United States

Emboldened after having the state department use her false claims to detain and deport critics of the Iran war, Loomer is now trying to use her connections to the U.S. state department to have critics of the Iran war- even U.S. citizens like Max Blumenthal- stripped of their citizenship.

July 8, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Wars for Israel | , | Comments Off on Laura Loomer wants Max Blumenthal stripped of citizenship and raided by the FBI for reporting in Iran

Netanyahu Says He Will “Fix” Social Media

By Kurt Nimmo | Another Day in the Empire | July 7, 2026

If there is anything positive about the war criminal Bibi Netanyahu, it is that his propaganda is remarkably transparent and easily debunked. For instance:

I’m sure Bibi is aware of Team Jorge, even if many Americans are not. Netanyahu hopes you’re unaware of the Team Jorge units of Israeli contractors engaged in malicious cyber activities, such as hacking, sabotage, and bot farm-run social media disinformation campaigns, with the intent of manipulating election outcomes.

It was outed in 2023 following an operation by journalists from France and Israel coordinated by Forbidden Stories. “The Israeli disinformation company ‘Team Jorge’ claims to control 39 000 ‘avatars’ online, without the platforms being able to detect them,” Le Monde reported.

“A team of Israeli contractors who claim to have manipulated more than 30 elections around the world using hacking, sabotage and automated disinformation on social media has been exposed in a new investigation,” The Guardian reported in 2023.

The unit is run by Tal Hanan, a 50-year-old former Israeli special forces operative who now works privately using the pseudonym “Jorge”, and appears to have been working under the radar in elections in various countries for more than two decades.

Hanan, who was covertly recorded, told journalists his black op service was available to intelligence agencies, political campaigns, and private companies “that wanted to secretly manipulate public opinion.” A software package, Advanced Impact Media Solutions, or Aims,

controls a vast army of thousands of fake social media profiles on Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook, Telegram, Gmail, Instagram and YouTube. Some avatars even have Amazon accounts with credit cards, bitcoin wallets and Airbnb accounts.

Hasbara, Israel’s “public diplomacy,” is well known. The term was created in the early days of Zionism and translates as “explanation” in Hebrew. It is described as a multifaceted effort to explain actions, “whether or not they are justified,” by the Zionist state. “Hasbara links information warfare to the strategic efforts of the state to bolster the unity of the home front,” according to Middle East Policy.

[and] ensure the support of allies; disrupt efforts to organize hostile coalitions; determine the way issues are defined by the media, the intelligentsia, and social networks; establish the parameters of politically correct discourse; delegitimize both critics and their arguments; and shape the common understanding and interpretation of the results of international negotiations.

Bibi is worried about the public relations fallout from his genocide campaign in Gaza, ethnic cleansing in Lebanon, and psychotic behavior ordering the murder of religious leaders, negotiators, and children from explosives hidden in pagers, to name but a few. In response to Israel’s manifest crimes against humanity, countries are denouncing and beginning to sanction the Zionist state and its ministers.

Team Jorge and the wider Hasbara network is doing all it can, short of murdering critics of Israel, to undermine and cancel the outrage and activism growing against Zionism and the settler state. Social media is rife with Zionist “avatars” and fake accounts, many no doubt generated by AI, to counter arguments that Israel is a genocidal monster that needs to be tamed.

July 7, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Comments Off on Netanyahu Says He Will “Fix” Social Media

Canada Considered Suing Citizens Over “False and Misleading” Social Media Posts

A 35-page memo, most of it blacked out, and the part they left visible is the part that should worry you.

By Cindy Harper – Reclaim The Net – July 7, 2026

The Canadian government drew up a plan to take individual citizens to court over what they post online. That plan sat inside a 35-page internal memo from the Department of Industry, most of it blacked out before the public could see it.

Blacklock’s Reporter pried the document loose through an Access to Information request. Dated March 31 and titled “Misinformation And Disinformation Strategy,” it belongs to the department run by Minister Mélanie Joly, known as ISED. The memo weighs “legal action” against people who post what the government calls “false and misleading information” on Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn.

What kind of legal action? The redactions hide that. What survives the black ink is the logic. “This strategy seeks to uphold the integrity of and public trust in government information,” the memo says. The department is appointing itself guardian of its own reputation, with lawsuits as one available tool.

Here is who would decide. ISED itself would judge whether a post is “factually incorrect, misleading or out of context.” The same department that dislikes a post gets to rule on whether the post is true. No court makes that call first and no independent reviewer checks the work. The government writes the definition of misinformation and then enforces it against the people it defines.

The memo describes any punishment as “proportionate and subject to senior level approval.” That language reassures no one. Proportion gets measured by the same officials pushing the complaint, and senior approval means a manager signs off, not a judge.

Officials already watch. Managers “already monitor the department’s official social media channels and media outlets on a daily basis for comments and recurring inaccuracies,” the memo says. The strategy would push that surveillance from reaction toward “prevention and early detection,” catching disfavored speech earlier in its life.

The chilling effect writes itself. A citizen who knows a federal department is reading posts, grading them for accuracy, and holding a lawsuit in reserve thinks twice before typing. The threat does the work a courtroom never has to.

The government’s own files admit the problem. Its research found Canadians feel capable of spotting fake news and do not want Ottawa “declaring what is true or not.” The memo concedes that answering misinformation can amplify it, and that going after individuals risks “further backlash.” The department understood the public would object and mapped the plan anyway.

Compare the tune from four years back. This same Liberal government declared that “the rights and freedoms that individuals have offline must also be protected online.” That promise reads differently next to a memo about suing people for their posts.

Ottawa has not explained how the monitoring runs, how often lawsuits were floated, or what a post must do to land on the department’s radar. The memo sets no threshold. It names no outside check. It leaves a federal department free to decide which citizens spoke falsely and what the price should be.

A government sure of its facts answers speech with more speech. This one drafted a plan to answer speech with lawyers.

July 7, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Comments Off on Canada Considered Suing Citizens Over “False and Misleading” Social Media Posts

French MEP Rima Hassan says terrorism trial aims to silence her pro-Palestine advocacy

Press TV – July 7, 2026

Ahead of her trial on charges of “apology for terrorism,” French Member of the European Parliament Rima Hassan says French authorities have subjected her to sweeping surveillance measures and political pressure in an effort to silence her criticism of Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

Hassan, a vocal pro-Palestinian lawmaker, appeared in court on Tuesday over the French offense of “apology for terrorism,” a legal provision that criminalises certain forms of expression deemed to support or glorify acts of terrorism.

“This is a political case,” Hassan said in an interview ahead of her court date. “It’s a way of putting the Palestinian cause on trial.”

Hassan added that the prosecution is part of a broader campaign targeting her for speaking out in support of Palestine.

The European Parliament member said she has faced intense judicial and political pressure in recent months.

She described disproportionate investigative measures, including the lifting of her parliamentary immunity, retroactive surveillance, and the dissemination of false information following her detention in April.

On April 2, Hassan was taken into police custody after posting on X a quote by Kozo Okamoto, a former member of the now-defunct Japanese Red Army.

The quote read: “As long as there is oppression, resistance will not only be a right, but a duty.”

Hassan said that while in police custody in April, she was subjected to particularly intrusive questioning about her identity, origins and religion, despite those issues having “no connection whatsoever to the alleged facts.”

“This way of proceeding is part of a political climate in which Palestinians, or people perceived as such, are too often regarded as suspects before they are regarded as citizens,” she said.

“This reflex, fuelled by Islamophobia and anti-Palestinian racism, constructs the dangerous figure of the ‘enemy within’,” she added.

In a press release issued ahead of the trial, Hassan’s team said the quote she shared on X was “referring to a principle that lies at the heart of international law: the right of peoples to resist colonization and the occupation of their territory by a foreign army.”

According to the statement, Hassan later deleted the post to avoid any possible misunderstanding.

The post was reported to the prosecutor’s office by far-right National Rally MP Matthias Renault, the French interior minister, the European Jewish Organisation (OJE), and the League Against Racism and Anti-Semitism (Licra).

The prosecution was initiated by the public prosecutor’s office, which operates under the authority of the executive branch.

Hassan said the “judicial harassment” she has faced demonstrates “how far some are willing to go to silence voices that denounce the suffering of the Palestinian people.”

The trial marks the latest legal challenge brought against Hassan over her criticism of Israel’s occupation and its genocide in Gaza. Over the past two years, 16 legal proceedings have been initiated against her, 13 of which have already been dismissed without further action.

July 7, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Comments Off on French MEP Rima Hassan says terrorism trial aims to silence her pro-Palestine advocacy

Israel is an apartheid state – and its weird marriage laws show us how

By Jonathan Cook | June 30, 2026

Israel’s supporters have gone apoplectic over a short post on X from the journalist Mehdi Hasan, highlighting Israel’s peculiar marriage laws.

Hasan asks: “Did you know that you can’t have a civil or secular marriage in Israel?”

He’s not wrong. Israel has banned civil marriage. You can wed only in a ceremony strictly controlled by religious authorities. If you want a civil marriage, you have to travel to another country.

Why, you might reasonably wonder. Isn’t Israel a modern, secular, western-style liberal democracy? After all, that’s what our politicians and media keep telling us.

The most popular rejoinder to Hasan from Israel’s apologists – that the situation is no better in Saudi Arabia – is not quite the flex they seem to imagine. So Israel offers the same human rights protections as Saudi Arabia? Impressive.

Others have pointed out that Israel inherited the so-called “millet” system from the Ottoman empire, which gave the leaders of each confessional group across the Middle East autonomous control over their community’s religious affairs.

Doubtless, 150 years ago the system worked relatively well in reducing communal tensions in religiously diverse parts of a large empire. It prevented officials in Constantinople – modern-day Istanbul – from getting dragged deeply into the day-to-day affairs of its often distant subjects.

But 150 years ago, Britain sent children up chimneys to sweep them. The law was changed around that time to stop this abusive and dangerous practice.

Israel was established nearly eight decades ago, supposedly as a secular, western-style liberal democracy. It has had 78 years to change those archaic Ottoman marriage laws.

Why hasn’t it done so?

All the bluster decrying Hasan’s post is a desperate attempt to deflect attention away from the fact that Israel’s antiquated marriage laws survive because they are useful to Israel.

In fact, they are more than that. They are a core component of Israel’s version of apartheid – a racist system of segregation Israel has successfully shielded from the view of western publics with the help of western politicians and media.

‘Demographic threat’

Israel’s ban on civil marriage is central to its efforts to prevent what past racist societies, such as apartheid South Africa and the American Deep South, termed “miscegenation” – that is, sexual relations between different ethnic groups. You might remember that the Nazis had unpleasant views on this subject too.

Here is the current finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, opposing miscegenation in 2016:

Preventing assimilation in the Jewish state is completely legitimate and not at all racist. You are assuming as a basis for the discussion that preventing intermarriage is wrong, while ignoring the fact that most [Jewish] girls who go with Arabs are poor girls who are being used.

Former education minister Rafi Peretz called mixed marriages involving Jews a “second Holocaust”.

In Israel, such views are entirely mainstream. In 2018, Yitzhak Herzog, Israel’s current president and the former leader of an ostensible leftwing Israeli party, described mixed marriages among American Jews as a “plague” for which a “solution” had to be found – presumably by copying Israel’s approach.

In Israel, the chief concern is not about marriages between Jews and the Palestinians under occupation – which Israel and its supporters like to present, bogusly, as a straightforward “security” matter.

In the occupied territories, Israel uses far blunter methods than laws to prevent any kind of intimate relations developing between Jews and a captive Palestinian population. It prefers physical containment and violence.

Palestinians under occupation are forcibly separated from Israeli Jews. They are hemmed into their own tightly confined ghettoes by Israel’s network of steel and concrete barriers; by the Israeli army; by checkpoints; by separate, apartheid roads in the West Bank; and by Jewish militias living on stolen lands in so-called “settlements”.

There is little chance of interaction, let alone intermarriage, in such circumstances – except when Israeli soldiers or armed Jewish settlers come rampaging into Palestinian communities to destroy cropskill livestockpoison wellstorch homes and cars, and beat up – and sometimes kill – the inhabitants.

Nonetheless, there is still a potential vulnerability in Israel’s system of segregation.

In 1948, Israel expelled 80 per cent of the Palestinian population from their homes and lands in an area that was henceforth to be called, not Palestine, but the “Jewish” state of Israel.

A few Palestinians remained, however, inside those borders – mostly from oversight or error. Despite covert efforts by Israel for several years after the 1948 war to force them out of the state, its officials soon came under international pressure to give these stranded Palestinians citizenship – even if in practice, as we shall see, this conferred on them very inferior rights.

Even today, Israel is extremely worried about a supposed threat from its third-class Palestinian “citizens” – officially termed “Israel’s Arabs”. Given a higher birth rate, their numbers have grown exponentially over eight decades. They now comprise a fifth of Israel’s population.

Israeli journalists, academics and politicians, including prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, regularly call the country’s Palestinian citizens a “demographic threat”, and endlessly worry about the “Palestinian womb”.

No state of all its citizens

But Israel faces a countervailing pressure. If it makes its treatment of Palestinian citizens too obviously racist and oppressive, some outsiders might start to realise it is not the secular western-style liberal democracy it claims to be.

You will hear the pro-Israel lobby in the West tell you that so-called “Israeli Arabs” have exactly the same rights as Israel’s Jewish population, guaranteed by Israel’s Declaration of Independence. That is not even remotely true.

Adalah, a leading legal rights group in Israel, has a database showing more than 70 laws that explicitly discriminate between Jewish citizens and Palestinian citizens. These laws form the core of Israel’s apartheid system.

Israel’s Basic Laws, a sort of constitution, explicitly exclude any principle of civic equality. Every attempt by a Palestinian party in Israel to get a debate in the parliament on Israel becoming a “state of all its citizens” – that is, a liberal democracy – is barred from discussion. And in 2018 the Israeli government passed a Nation-State Law declaring that Israel belongs exclusively to the Jewish people, not to all citizens who live there.

As with Palestinians under occupation, Israel has almost entirely confined its Palestinian citizens to their own segregated, underfunded, under-resourced communities (townships) on less then 3 per cent of the country’s territory.

A small minority of Palestinian citizens inside Israel live in segregated, deprived neighbourhoods of what are misleadingly termed “mixed” cities. Other Palestinian citizens, the most oppressed of all, live in communities inhabited by their families for centuries but which have been criminalised by an Israeli state that refuses to recognise them.

Many hundreds of Jewish rural communities, by contrast, operate effectively as exclusive membership clubs. They have the power to exclude Palestinian citizens – a right they take full advantage of.

Separate planning structures ensure massively overcrowded Palestinian communities inside Israel are unable to build new homes and expand. Palestinian children are schooled in a separate and much inferior education system.

For the who wish to dig deeper, I have written a lengthy essay setting out the details of Israel’s apartheid system here.

The ban on civil marriage inside Israel’s borders is not usually cited, even by critics, as an example of its apartheid system of rule. But the ban persists because it is the ideal way to conceal segregation under the veneer of equal treatment.

Israel’s Palestinian citizens must marry in ceremonies conducted by their religious community’s leaders: by Muslim clerics, or by various Christian churches, or by the Druze clergy.

It is the same for Jews in israel. They must be married by an Orthodox rabbi.

So everyone faces the same restrictions. But the point is this: the equality of treatment ensures very unequal outcomes. It is designed that way.

Fascist thugs

Inside Israel, intermarriage is only possible if one party can convert to their partner’s religion.

Israel’s Orthodox rabbinate makes it impossible for Palestinians under occupation to convert to Judaism in Israel, with the head of its conversion authority stating in 2016 that any such applicants are rejected “without review because of their ethnic origin”.

Meanwhile, Israel makes it almost as difficult for anyone else considered a non-Jew to convert to Judaism, most especially Palestinian citizens. Over decades, there have been only a handful of such cases.

In practice, this means that in any relationship between a Palestinian citizen of Israel and an Israeli Jew, it almost always falls to the Israeli Jew to convert to the religion of the Palestinian citizen, whether a Muslim, Christian or Druze. That entails the Jewish partner losing their Jewish status and the many consequential privileges inside Israel that derive from that status.

Israel has found this is a much better solution than apartheid South Africa’s, where blacks and whites were explicitly barred by law from marrying. Israel can achieve the same result more quietly.

Given the entirely segregated structure of Israeli society, and the strong social taboos among Israeli Jews on “miscegenation”, the number of intermarriages in Israel between Jews and Palestinian citizens barely reaches double digits each year.

There are even groups like Lehava – Israel’s version of the Ku Klux Klan – that go around beating up Palestinians caught anywhere near the Jewish neighbourhoods of Jerusalem and terrorising any young Jewish women suspected of being romantically involved with a Palestinian. Lehava hold noisy and disruptive protests to shame the odd Jewish woman who converts and marries a Palestinian citizen.

All of this happens with a quiet wink from the authorities. The current police minister, Itamar Ben Gvir, has long been a patron of the fascist, Jewish supremacist thugs of Lehava.

In the rare cases of a Jew converting and marrying a Palestinian citizen, the Palestinian partner faces innumerable legal and social obstacles to integrating into a Jewish community to which they do not belong.

Instead, the Jewish partner moves to a Palestinian community – an Israeli version of a township like Soweto – and educates their children inside the vastly inferior “Arab” school system. The former Jew loses most of the ethnic privileges they previously enjoyed inside the world’s only “Jewish” state.

Faced with this as their future, such couples often seize the opportunity for neither to convert and instead marry and live abroad.

Unwelcome guests

None of these difficulties are accidental. It is exactly how you would expect an apartheid system that prefers to obscure its apartheid character to structure its laws – and thereby help its lobby in the West, including the western political and media class, to claim that Israel is “the only democracy in the Middle East”.

Israel learnt from the mistakes of the old South Africa. It mastered the modern arts of public relations – or at least it did until Benjamin Netanyahu tore up the script by erasing Gaza.

Inside Israel, the apartheid system extends far beyond marriage laws to touch all areas of life.

Here is another way Israel has obscured its apartheid system – again not in the occupied territories, but inside Israel itself.

The same system that denies Israelis the possibility of a civil or secular marriage also refuses to recognise that they have any kind of civil or secular identity, simply as Israelis. By law, everyone in Israel must belong to a confessional group, identified as a Jew, Muslim, Christian or Druze.

Which makes sense of another little-known fact about Israel: Israel is the only country in the world that does not recognise its own – in this case, Israeli – nationality. Why? For the simple reason that, were Israelis to share a common national identity, it would be much harder for the Israeli state to operate its apartheid system.

Israeli nationality exists only as a fiction on Israeli passports to allow the population to travel internationally. Inside Israel, everyone is identified by their confessional group.

In Israel, “Jewish” is treated as a nationality. Remember the 2018 Nation State Law. What it declared is that the state of Israel belongs exclusively to the “nation” of Jews – that is, to every Jew around the globe, not just those living in Israel.

Muslims and Christians are lumped together into a similarly artificial “Arab” nationality, while the Druze have their own, different nationality. The same Nation State Law makes clear that the state of Israel does not belong to these other, non-Jewish “nations”, despite their families having lived on the same lands for centuries. Palestinian citizens are nothing more than guests – and unwelcome ones at that.

This segregation carries through to Israel’s ID cards. These cards, which must be carried at all times, used to include a section that expressly showed the “nationality” of each Israeli. But this section attracted uncomfortable scrutiny during a lengthy and ultimately unsuccessful legal battle by a group of dissident Israelis seeking recognition of an Israeli nationality. Officials removed the category from the card. However, Israel’s population register still includes a nationality classification.

In addition to Jew, Arab and Druze, there are more than 120 other categories to deal with all the anomalies. I was just one such anomaly after I married a Palestinian Christian and entered a lengthy and difficult naturalisation process. My nationality was classed as “British”.

Why all this complexity? Why all this unique weirdness?

Because Israel needs to conceal its system of apartheid. The old South Africa simply said: one law for whites and another for blacks.

Israel knows this no longer plays well. So it has devised a convoluted, baffling system that few understand as a way to avoid attracting attention and criticism.

Special Jewish rights

So let’s end with just one example of how Israel’s apartheid system works in practice.

Notionally, Israel confers on all its citizens – Jews, Muslims, Christians, Druze – equal rights as citizens. But with a sleight of hand, it then undermines those equal rights by conferring superior “national” rights on one group only, Jews. If there is a conflict between a citizenship right and a Jewish “national” right, you’ve probably already guessed that the Jewish national right takes precedence.

Education is a good illustration. All Israeli citizens enjoy a right to have their children educated, because education is a citizenship right. But lots of veiled manoeuvres – like extra budgets for National Priority Areas, special subsidies for Jewish religious schools, funding from the diaspora, and bigger tax disbursements from central government for Jewish local authorities – mean Jewish schools are far better funded than “Arab” schools.

Education for Israel’s Palestinian citizens has been underfunded for eight decades. So even though Israel’s apologists will claim the funding gaps are slowly narrowing, the continuing shortfall simply compounds a decades-long historical injustice. Arab schools are so far behind they can never catch up without aggressive additional funding Israel clearly has no intention of ever providing them with.

There are massive shortages of classrooms and staff in dilapidated school buildings. Old books are often grossly outdated and poorly translated into Arabic by the state. Palestinian educational leaders have no input into the curriculum the community’s children are taught. There are strict controls by Jewish (usually racist) officials over what can be taught and who can teach. And on top of all this, huge cultural biases in qualifying tests make it far harder for Palestinian citizens to gain entry to universities in Israel.

There are many other problems in education. For example, nearly one in 10 Palestinian children in Israel live in historic communities built on lands that the Israeli state now wishes to “Judaise” – reserve for the Jewish population – and are therefore denied all recognition.

Treated like criminals, these children rarely have schools in their communities because no permanent buildings are allowed. What buildings there are cannot be connected to the electricity or water grids. Even children of kindergarten age must typically travel long distances – sometimes close to 60 km a day – to get to a licensed school.

The forms of discrimination in education alone are endless. But they do not stop there. The discrimination is replicated in all major facets of life for Israel’s more than 2 million Palestinian citizens through these conceptual and legal contortions over religion, citizenship and nationality.

None of this should be a surprise. It is exactly what you would expect in an apartheid state like Israel.

July 6, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance, Timeless or most popular, Video | , , , | Comments Off on Israel is an apartheid state – and its weird marriage laws show us how