Israeli Journalist Demands Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens Be Placed in WWII-Style Internment Camps
The Talmudic mask comes off
José Niño Unfiltered | March 17, 2026
The landscape of American free speech has entered treacherous new terrain. On February 27, 2026, an Israeli historian and journalist named Yair Kleinbaum published an editorial in JFeed demanding that the United States government arrest and detain Tucker Carlson, Nick Fuentes, Candace Owens, Cenk Uygur, Jackson Hinkle, and other prominent commentators who have opposed American military action against Iran. The model he proposed for their imprisonment was the World War II internment of Japanese Americans.
“It’s time to put Fuentes, Owens, Carlson and Uygur inside a WWII-Style internment camp,” Kleinbaum wrote. “We have reached a point where there is no choice but to take decisive action and arrest them.”
Kleinbaum’s argument rested on the claim that these commentators had crossed from protected speech into criminal incitement by allegedly encouraging soldiers to defy orders and discouraging enlistment. He explicitly compared them to Japanese Americans during World War II, though he distinguished the cases by asserting that unlike those who were “unjustly profiled,” the targeted influencers had “proven that their loyalty is with anti-American forces.”
“Just as the Japanese-American population was suspected of loyalty to a murderous Japanese regime that had declared war on America during World War II, these figures, including Jackson Hinkle and others, have, unlike most those Japanese who were unjustly profiled, proven that their loyalty is with anti-American forces,” Kleinbaum wrote. “Hence their call for mutiny.”
Kleinbaum himself is a graduate student at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in the Department of History of the Jewish People and Contemporary Jewry. He also served as a research assistant in the Jewish Peoplehood department at The Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya, now Reichman University. His academic work focuses on the history of the Israeli political left between 1967 and 1973.
For perspective, JFeed is an English language news platform founded in 2023 and led by CEO Yarit Elbaz and Editor in Chief Eli Gotthelf, who previously worked at Kikar HaShabbat, an Israeli Haredi news outlet. The platform describes itself as “proudly unfiltered, proudly Jewish, and proudly committed to conservative values,” with the stated mission of becoming “the leading English-language news source for global Jewry.” Kleinbaum serves as one of the platform’s most prolific writers, covering breaking news on the Iran conflict, antisemitism analysis, and U.S. Israel relations.
Kleinbaum’s call for internment is not a fringe view among the American Jewish community. Multiple surveys reveal a community deeply divided on these questions. A CHIP50 survey in 2024 found that 39 percent of American Jews supported restrictions “prohibiting speech that opposes Israel’s existence as a Jewish state” on college campuses, compared to only 21 percent of non-Jews.
A Forward-CHIP50 poll in 2024 found 31 percent of Jews supported “prohibiting certain political speech” on campus, while 47 percent were opposed. Separately, 44 percent supported banning statements of support for Hamas, and 58 percent supported using law enforcement to police campus demonstrations.
The Japanese American internment that Kleinbaum cited as his model represents one of the most egregious violations of civil liberties in American history. Following the attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941, President Franklin Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066, which authorized the forced removal of approximately 120,000 people of Japanese ancestry from the West Coast. The majority were American citizens. They were imprisoned in remote camps surrounded by barbed wire and armed guards, losing their homes, businesses, and livelihoods.
Decades later, the United States government formally apologized for this injustice. In 1988, President Ronald Reagan signed the Civil Liberties Act, which acknowledged that the internment was based on “race prejudice, war hysteria, and a failure of political leadership.” The government paid reparations to surviving internees.
An even more insidious aspect of the Japanese internment that is often overlooked by court historians is how Jewish individuals benefited from the Roosevelt administration’s internment policy. Gus Russo’s 2006 book Supermob: How Sidney Korshak and His Criminal Associates Became America’s Hidden Power Brokers contains a chapter that directly addresses the seizure and sale of Japanese American properties during WWII.
Russo’s book details how the Office of Alien Property Custodian (OAP), headed by David L. Bazelon—a well-connected Chicago attorney and son of Russian-Jewish immigrants—oversaw the liquidation of seized Japanese American (and German-owned) properties after the war. According to Russo, Bazelon sold many of these properties to associates linked to Chicago mob lawyer Sidney Korshak—also of Jewish extraction—and members of the Pritzker family for pennies on the dollar. Russo identifies David Bazelon as running the OAP and controlling the disposition of properties collectively worth an estimated $400 million in 1942 dollars (billions today), including half a million acres of California farmland and some 1,265 small Japanese-owned hotels.
Jay Pritzker — patriarch of the Hyatt hotel fortune — was hired as an assistant attorney at the OAP under Bazelon and allegedly profited from the fire-sale liquidations. The broader network Russo calls the “Supermob” — a cadre of mostly Chicago-connected figures with ties to organized crime — acquired California land, hotels, and urban parcels through these OAP sales.
Back to Kleinbaum, his demand for the state detention of Israel’s vocal critics reflects a deepening panic within the Jewish community following the October 7 conflict. The graphic, public nature of those events triggered a global realization, driving millions to critically examine the extent and nature of Jewish influence in their own nations. This shift signifies that the traditional methods of social control—specifically the use of guilt-based Holocaust tropes to silence dissent—have lost their efficacy. As Jewry’s reliance on soft power through propaganda falters, they are increasingly turning to the hard power of state-sanctioned speech suppression.
What appears as the reactionary outburst of a single, traumatized Jewish intellectual may signal a shift toward a broader, more aggressive strategy intended to crush the burgeoning opposition to Jewish hegemony across the West. These efforts to institutionalize censorship are a testament to the fragility of a crumbling Judeo-American order. The truth is no longer a hidden secret, and the attempt to force it back into the shadows is a battle that world Jewry is poised to lose once gentiles wake up from their slumber.
Meet The Ellisons: Zionists, Technocrats, Moguls
Corbett | March 10, 2026
Who are the Ellisons? Where does their immense fortune come from? And how do they plan to use that fortune? By the end of today’s episode, you’re going to know more about the Ellison family, Zionists, technocrats, media moguls, and how they are using their power to shape your future.
UK Parliament Plans ISP Blocking and Age Verification Powers
By Cam Wakefield | Reclaim The Net | March 10, 2026
If you wanted a case study in how modern democracies widen state oversight step by step, Britain has offered a clear example. On March 9, two major surveillance-related bills advanced through Parliament, each pointing toward broader government authority, reduced personal privacy, and tighter limits on protest activity.
These measures advanced through procedural votes and technical amendments that sounded administrative, yet carry consequences for how millions of people use the internet and exercise civic rights.
The main legislative action unfolded in the House of Commons during debate on the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill. Members of Parliament actually rejected amendments from the House of Lords that would have required age verification for VPNs and certain user-to-user services.
But don’t get too excited. Replacement amendments approved by MPs would grant significant new authority to the state. The powers allow the government to require internet service providers to block or restrict children’s access to specific online platforms, impose time-of-day limits on when services can be used, and mandate age verification across nearly any platform that enables users to post or share content.
The replacement amendments allow the UK government to make regulations that require specified “information society services” (a definition that applies to most online services) to implement age verification to prevent children from using the service.
This is as bad as it gets. The practical challenges are considerable and the privacy issues are even worse. Internet service providers supply connections to households rather than individuals. Enforcing child-specific restrictions would require identifying which devices belong to minors through ID verification and applying controls selectively, a level of precision that home broadband systems were never designed to provide.
Enforcement may therefore produce household-wide restrictions or increased pressure on platforms to verify the age of all users.
The amendments now return to the House of Lords. Approval there would send the bill to Royal Assent.
Openly Pro-Israel Tech Group Now Has Control over UK’s Most Sensitive National Security Data
By Alan Macleod | MintPress News | February 7, 2023
This is the story of how a multibillionaire who has dedicated his life to advancing the cause of the Israeli national security state is now in control of Great Britain’s most sensitive public and military data.
In 2020, software giant Oracle won a gigantic contract with the United Kingdom’s Ministry of Defence (MoD) to provide it with cloud infrastructure, digital assistance, data visualization software, mobile hub and development tools. The military is far from the only British institution entrusting its most sensitive data to the Texas-based firm, however. The Home Office, Office of National Statistics and National Health Service, among others, also rely on Oracle databases to function.
For years before signing the MoD agreement, Oracle founder Larry Ellison had been ingratiating himself with the British establishment, employing all manner of well-connected individuals at his foundation. Among these included media executive and father-in-law of former Prime Minister Boris Johnson, Matthew Symonds, who earned over $600,000 per year as the executive director of the Larry Ellison Foundation. Richard Meredith, a longtime director of the U.K.’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office, was also snapped up at a similar salary to become deputy executive director.
Many other well-connected British government officials, including Vel Gnanendran, went straight from the Larry Ellison Foundation into the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and worked there at the time that the body signed off on the lucrative Oracle contracts. For years, the Larry Ellison Foundation also bankrolled the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change, the former U.K. prime minister’s new political project.
Yet, just after as the partnership with the Ministry of Defence was secured, Ellison abruptly shut down his foundation, prompting speculation that it had fulfilled its purpose.
“Our mission to support Israel”
Why this should be of concern is that both Ellison and key Oracle figures have made clear that their business model is less about making money, and more focused on furthering the interests of the Israeli national security state.
Furthermore, few people realize how important Oracle is to the functioning of the modern world. It is the third-largest software company globally. Yet because it sells its products to businesses and governments rather than consumers, it is far less known than competitors such as Microsoft or Amazon. Nevertheless, it is as important to the modern hi-tech economy as its rivals, its software and databases powering the likes of Netflix, Zoom, financial corporations such as JPMorgan Chase, as well as a myriad of educational institutions.
While opening a new data center in Jerusalem in 2021, the company’s Israeli-American CEO, Safra Catz, laid out Oracle’s purpose, stating,
We are not flexible regarding our mission, and our commitment to Israel is second to none. This is a free world and I love my employees, and if they don’t agree with our mission to support the State of Israel, then maybe we aren’t the right company for them. Larry [Ellison] and I are publicly committed to Israel and devote personal time to the country, and no one should be surprised by that.”
Catz made the comments in response to a question about Israel’s poor human rights record and the rebellion of Silicon Valley employees refusing to facilitate the country’s war crimes. In 2017, Catz was offered the position of U.S. Director of National Intelligence.

Safra Catz, Oracle’s CEO, poses with Alon Ben (left), CEO of Tel-Aviv-based Oracle data partner, Bynet
Ellison, if anything, is even more forthright in his support for the Israeli government and its agenda. The billionaire – currently the fourth-richest individual in the world – has bankrolled the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) for years, giving tens of millions of dollars to the Friends of the IDF, including the largest single donation the organization has ever received. In 2017 alone, he pledged $16.6 million to build a new training facility for IDF soldiers defending, in his words, “our home”. As Ellison explained:
Through all of the perilous times since Israel’s founding, we have called on the brave men and women of the IDF to defend our home. In my mind, there is no greater honor than supporting some of the bravest people in the world, and I thank Friends of the IDF for allowing us to celebrate and support these soldiers year after year. We should do all we can to show these heroic soldiers that they are not alone.”
This was far from his first donation to the organization. Three years previously, he gave $9 million at a star-studded gala – the largest donation on a record-breaking night for the FIDF.
The big tech mogul also has a direct hand in furthering the Israeli settlement project. In 2007, he met with then-Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni to pledge half a million dollars in support to the Israeli border town of Sderot.
But if Ellison can count Livni as a friend, then Benjamin Netanyahu is virtually family. The pair have been close for many years; Ellison even flew Netanyahu out to his private Hawaiian island to vacation together. There, he offered the embattled prime minister a seat on Oracle’s board, replete with a salary of $450,000.
Netanyahu had previously gone to Ellison, encouraging him to buy out the struggling Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper in an attempt to change the outlet from an adversary of his political project into a mouthpiece for his Likud Party.
Unsurprisingly, Oracle has signed numerous deals with the Israeli national security state.
“The Israelis think they control the Foreign Office. And they do!”
In recent years, Israel and pro-Israel groups have managed to amass considerable influence over U.K. government policy. A measure of this is the fact that, by 2021, one-third of the cabinet – including then-Prime Minister Boris Johnson – were directly funded by the Israeli government or pro-Israel organizations. Chief amongst these groups is the Conservative Friends of Israel, who have claimed that 80% of Tory members of parliament belong to their organization.
The Israel lobby has been able to shape government policy, to the point where they blocked Boris Johnson’s appointment of Alan Duncan to the post of Middle East Minister. Johnson, according to Duncan, was “indignant”. “They shouldn’t behave like this”, the prime minister reportedly said about the Israelis, but acquiesced to their demands. “The Israelis think they control the Foreign Office. And they do”, Duncan later wrote. Home Secretary Priti Patel (a longtime champion of the apartheid state) also secretly flew to Israel for “off the radar” talks with Netanyahu – a huge breach of ministerial codes, for which she later resigned.
The Israeli Embassy also played a key role in the coordinated smear campaign demonizing Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, an operation that helped to ensure Johnson’s electoral victory in 2019.
In addition to this, there have also been national security questions raised about the extent to which Israeli businessmen have bought up key British industries. Last year, for example, Patrick Drahi’s attempt to purchase 18% of BT, the formerly state-owned telecoms giant that owns and controls much of the country’s telecommunications infrastructure, was put on hold due to concerns over national security.
That a company like Oracle that defines itself so explicitly as pro-Israel raises serious concerns over the nature of the work they do for the United Kingdom or any other nation. How can the Ministry of Defence or the Home Office’s data be considered uncompromised in these hands?
The CIA in all but name
“The Oracle database is used to keep track of basically everything,” Ellison once said, adding,
The information about your banks, your checking balance, your savings balance, is stored in an Oracle database. Your airline reservation is stored in an Oracle database. What books you bought on Amazon is stored in an Oracle database. Your profile on Yahoo! is stored in an Oracle database.”
This should be of concern to everyone, as Oracle itself started off as a project for the Central Intelligence Agency. Indeed, Ellison named his company after Project Oracle, a 1970s CIA operation he worked on.
“Our very first customer was the Central Intelligence Agency,” Ellison boasted, telling the story of how, in 1977, the CIA commissioned his firm to build them a database. From there, Ellison immediately began pitching to other wings of the national security state, and within months had secured contracts with Navy Intelligence, Air Force Intelligence and the NSA. The bottomless pit of money available for the military has helped turn Oracle from a tiny operation to a $46 billion dollar per year behemoth.
One of Oracle’s largest deals came in 2020, when it was part of a consortium that won a 15-year contract with the CIA and the other 16 U.S. intelligence agencies said to be with tens of billions of dollars.
Part of the reason the CIA trusts Oracle is that the company’s upper echelons are filled with ex-CIA executives. A case in point is former CIA Director and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, who was appointed to the company’s board in 2015. David Carney, who spent 32 years at the agency, rising to become its third-in-command, also joined Oracle, heading up its information assurance center.
Indeed, on its own website, Oracle aggressively recruits CIA agents, sharing stories of former spooks who have gone on to succeed in its ranks. One of those is Senior Technical Program Manager Andrew C. “As an Intelligence Officer in the US Navy, as well as in the CIA, Andrew has had to lead, build teams, and work on fast-breaking projects, all things Oracle requires on a regular basis,” Oracle writes, before actively encouraging other agents to apply,
Now that you’ve heard about Andrew’s experience, are you ready to join Oracle National Security Region team? If you hold a U.S. Government Top Secret SCI or higher clearance, click here to check out our latest opportunities. Once you’ve found an opening that fits your talent, passion, skills, and background, apply for us to consider you. Create the future with us.”

Oracle, a firm that stores reams of your sensitive data, openly boasts of its cozy ties to the CIA
The revolving door between Oracle and the CIA also swings the other way, with Oracle staff finding employment in Langley, VA.
The Silicon Valley giant also works closely with the U.S. military. “Oracle Cloud is advancing Department of Defense mission success”, it boasts on its website. Oracle notes that it is “delivering real-time intel to warfighters”, thereby “securing command and control at the tactical edge.” Thus, by the company’s own telling, it is a centerpiece of both the military-industrial-complex and the national security state. Big media outlets agree: “Larry Ellison is a billionaire today thanks to the CIA” concluded Business Insider.
Surveillance State
If Ellison had his way, however, Oracle would be an even more crucial part of a greatly expanded national security state. In the immediate wake of the September 11 attacks, he flew in for a series of meetings with top Bush-era officials, including NSA chief Michael Hayden and Attorney General John Ashcroft. There, he likely pitched an idea he had been promoting for some time: a single, comprehensive national security database that collected every piece of information possible to identify someone, from thumbprints and iris scans to medical history and social security details. “The single greatest step we Americans could take to make life tougher for terrorists would be to ensure that all the information in myriad government databases was copied into a single, comprehensive national security database,” he insisted.
In the end, even the Bush administration balked at such a sweeping project. Nevertheless, Oracle has deeply ingratiated itself into the world of policing and surveillance. In 2012, at the height of an anti-NATO demonstration, U.S. law enforcement used Oracle’s Endeca software to match protestors’ tweets with data about their criminal records, 911 calls and other information to pre-arrest demonstration leaders before the action took off.
Since then, Oracle has sold the same or similar software to authorities in Europe, South America, the Middle East and China. Job listings for developers at Guantánamo Bay also note that familiarity with Endeca and Oracle software is a desired trait.
Oracle is far from the only Silicon Valley giant with questionable ties to intelligence. Here at MintPress, we have exposed how Facebook’s top ranks are filled with former FBI and CIA agents, how ex-Israeli spies have found roles working for Microsoft and Google, and uncovered what we termed a “NATO to TikTok pipeline.”
Yet the openness with which Oracle and Ellison work with the Israeli state to further its interests should be highly concerning to those working in national security. Israel already has a long history of using its tech industry to surveil and eavesdrop on foreign governments.
Can it really be a wise idea for the United Kingdom to entrust its most sensitive government, health and defense data to a company with such close ties to the Israeli government?
So far, Great Britain has overlooked the potential grave national security threat this poses. Surely this cannot continue indefinitely.
Alan MacLeod is Senior Staff Writer for MintPress News. After completing his PhD in 2017 he published two books: Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting and Propaganda in the Information Age: Still Manufacturing Consent, as well as a number of academic articles. He has also contributed to FAIR.org, The Guardian, Salon, The Grayzone, Jacobin Magazine, and Common Dreams.
Lowkey is a British-Iraqi hip-hop artist, academic, political campaigner, and a MintPress video and podcast host. As a musician, he has collaborated with the Arctic Monkeys, Wretch 32, Immortal Technique, and Akala. He is a patron of Stop The War Coalition, Palestine Solidarity Campaign, the Racial Justice Network, and The Peace and Justice Project founded by Jeremy Corbyn.
Indian journalist reveals severe Israeli censorship after escape from occupied territories
Press TV – March 7, 2026
An Indian journalist who was trapped in the occupied territories from February 28 to March 6 has revealed severe Israeli censorship amid the regime’s war of aggression against Iran.
Braj Mohan Singh of India’s Sandha News said he witnessed people dying in 100‑foot‑deep bunkers while Israeli officials withheld details.
Missiles “don’t differentiate between Indian or Israeli,” he said.
He contrasted press freedom in India with the restrictions in Israel, noting journalists cannot film bodies, visit hospitals, or receive accurate casualty numbers. Local accounts often reveal far higher losses than official reports, he added.
“When an incident takes place, we are not given the details of the location. The next day, when we visit the site, we are told, ‘There was only one casualty,’ but a local told us, ‘There were four houses, and everyone died,” which shows there was a major incident,’” he added.
Despite Israel’s touted advanced warning systems, Singh reported missiles arriving without sirens or prior alerts, highlighting technology failures and the unpredictability of drone and missile attacks.
He also mentioned reports of Iranian targeting of US embassies across West Asia and possible attempts in Tel Aviv, underscoring the heightened danger in the region.
The regimes in Washington and Tel Aviv started their unprovoked military assault on February 28, assassinating Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei and top Iranian military commanders.
Iran began to swiftly retaliate against the criminal aggression by launching barrages of missile and drone attacks on the Israeli-occupied territories as well as on US bases in regional countries.
Majority of Israelis Back War with Iran as Anti-War Minority Faces Stigmatization
teleSUR | March 7, 2026
Israelis who oppose the war with Iran face threats and stigmatization, according to testimonies collected by a Spanish news agency. However, they represent a small minority, as 93% of Jewish Israelis support the offensive, a new poll by the Israel Democracy Institute (IDI) shows.
“Opposing the war and war crimes in Israel is practically a punishable offense. Even leftists and pacifists consider this a ‘just war,’” Adam Eli, secretary of the Jewish-Arab leftist coalition Hadash in Tel Aviv said.
Among those few critics is 19-year-old activist Itamar Greenberg, known in Israel for refusing to serve in the military in 2024. That decision, he recounted, cost him six months in prison and ostracism at his university, where he still leads a student circle while studying law.
Nearly one year after walking out of prison, Greenberg found himself back in custody on Tuesday for attending an anti-war rally that barely mustered 20 people across a nation of 10 million.
“About 40 police officers charged at us, confiscated our signs, and beat us. I was arrested and stripped naked for a search,” Greenberg said. He is also the founder of Mesarvot, a network of Israeli youth refusing military service.
An anti-war demonstration scheduled for Saturday at Habima Square in Tel Aviv will test wartime restrictions that cap gatherings at 50 people.
Meanwhile, restrictions on the right to assembly have been applied loosely during recent Purim celebrations—a sort of Jewish carnival—while Israeli authorities continue to bar Palestinians from praying at Al Aqsa Mosque despite Ramadan, and have militarily sealed off much of the West Bank.
How, and why, US data centers in the Gulf became targets of war
Al Mayadeen | March 6, 2026
The drone strikes that knocked Amazon Web Services facilities offline in the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain this week were not random acts of escalation. They were, according to analysts and industry insiders, a calculated strike on infrastructure that the United States has quietly woven into its military architecture across West Asia.
Amazon and Google hold a $1.2 billion contract with the Israeli government to provide cloud computing and artificial intelligence services to entities, including the Israeli occupation forces.
That contract, largely absent from Western coverage of the strikes, may explain why AWS facilities, and not the dozens of data centers operated by local Gulf companies on behalf of US tech giants, were the ones that were hit.
“It would be easier to target AWS,” Ed Galvin, founder of data center research firm DC Byte, told Bloomberg, noting that other US tech services are typically housed within locally operated facilities, making them harder to identify and strike.
Of approximately 230 data centers built or under development across Gulf Arab states, only a handful are wholly owned and operated by a US company, according to DC Byte. All three struck this week belong to Amazon.
What was hit
The strikes took down two of AWS’s three availability zones in the UAE, one site located near Al Maktoum International Airport in Dubai, according to DC Byte, and damaged a facility in Bahrain situated close to a local military base and the King Fahd Causeway connecting the island to Saudi Arabia.
Consumer services, including online banking, were disrupted across the region. In a statement to clients, AWS said it was working to restore services while urging customers to migrate workloads to data centers outside West Asia, acknowledging that “the broader operating environment in the Middle East remains unpredictable.”
What Western media outlets fail to mention is that the exchange has not been one-sided. “Israel” and the United States have struck at least two data centers in Tehran, according to Holistic Resilience, a nonprofit organisation that maps airstrike activity.
A new front in an old logic
Data centers have entered the battlefield as legitimate targets because they power surveillance systems, drone navigation, real-time analysis of satellite footage, and the digital backbone of modern military operations.
Attacking such facilities can “paralyze banks, paralyze government offices,” Daniel Efrati, chief executive of NED Data Centers, told Bloomberg. “If you have one minute of downtime, it can cost any organization millions.”
Soft targets with hard consequences
The physical vulnerability of these facilities has been laid bare by this week’s strikes. Data centers are sprawling, visible, and dependent on exposed infrastructure, e.g., cooling units, diesel generators, gas turbines, that can be disabled without a direct hit on the building itself.
“If you knock out some of the chillers you can take them fully offline,” Sam Winter-Levy, a fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, told the Financial Times. Conventional data center security is designed to repel cyberattacks and physical intruders; it was not designed for drones.
Gulf AI ambitions under fire
The strikes land at a particularly fraught moment for Gulf states whose economic diversification strategies rest heavily on positioning themselves as global AI hubs. Saudi Arabia’s Humain and the UAE’s G42, both state-backed, have committed to vast data center clusters and signed major deals with Nvidia, Amazon, and Microsoft.
The UAE is constructing one of OpenAI’s “Stargate” facilities in Abu Dhabi. Microsoft announced last month it would open a new Azure facility in Saudi Arabia before the end of the year. Those ambitions now carry a new risk premium.
“The Gulf sold itself as a safe alternative to other markets,” Jessica Brandt, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, told the Financial Times. “That argument just got harder to make.”
The new table stakes
Harder, but not necessarily fatal. Several analysts caution that the political and economic momentum behind Gulf AI investment is unlikely to be reversed by the strikes alone.
What has changed is the calculus around protection. “You can’t hide data centers,” Noah Sylvia, an analyst at the Royal United Services Institute, told Bloomberg. “But you can put air defence systems on them.”
One industry veteran based in the Gulf compared the situation to Intel’s chip manufacturing plants in “Israel,” ringed by military air defences, telling the Financial Times that for a project of Stargate’s scale, that kind of protection is now “table stakes.”
A global precedent
The broader implication reaches beyond the Gulf. “This is a harbinger of what’s to come,” Winter-Levy told the Financial Times, “and these types of attacks are not going to be limited to the Middle East.”
For the first time in history, the data centers that underpin the global digital economy have become a theater of war. The infrastructure the US built to project technological power across a volatile region has become a target precisely because of what it enables.
Security Researchers Warn Age Verification Laws Are Building a Global Surveillance System

By Ken Macon | Reclaim The Net | March 3, 2026
Three hundred and seventy-one security and privacy academics from 29 countries signed an open letter this week calling on governments to halt age verification rollouts until the privacy and security implications are properly understood.
The letter arrives as lawmakers across the world race to ban children from social media, pushing platforms to implement age checks before anyone has settled on what those checks should actually look like.
The signatories are unambiguous. Deploying large-scale identity verification systems without a clear grasp of what they do to user security, autonomy, and freedom is, in their words, “dangerous and socially unacceptable.”
Among those signing: Ronald Rivest, Turing Award winner, and Bart Preneel, president of the International Association for Cryptologic Research. These voices represent the core of the global security research community.
What governments are building, the letter argues, is surveillance infrastructure masquerading as child protection. A real age verification system, the academics explain, would require “government-issued IDs with strong cryptographic protection for every single interaction with the service.”
That means every search query, every message to a friend, every news article read online would require identity confirmation. Nothing in offline life demands that. The parallel doesn’t exist.
Companies are already moving. OpenAI, Roblox, and Discord have all begun implementing age checks in anticipation of legal mandates.
The academics aren’t dismissing the underlying concern. “We share the concerns about the negative effects that exposure to harmful content online has on children,” the letter states. What they’re rejecting is the proposed solution, which turns every adult into a suspect who must prove their identity before accessing the open web.
The technical problems compound the political ones. Building and maintaining identity verification at a global scale is genuinely hard. Many service providers, faced with the friction and cost, would simply refuse to comply.
And the platforms that can deploy these systems at scale are a handful of large corporations, meaning age verification becomes another mechanism for centralizing internet infrastructure in the hands of the few companies already dominant enough to afford it.
There’s another risk the academics name directly: governments banning VPNs. Age checks are trivially circumvented with a VPN, and the predictable policy response is to ban them outright. VPNs are currently one of the few tools available to people living under authoritarian regimes trying to protect their communications and identities.
Banning VPNs to enforce age checks on teenagers would strip that protection from dissidents, journalists, and activists worldwide. The collateral damage would be severe and global.
The academics are asking for a pause until scientific consensus forms around “the benefits and harms that age-assurance technologies can bring, and on the technical feasibility.”
What’s unreasonable is building mass identity verification systems first and studying the consequences after.
EPSTEIN FILES REVEAL POWER BROKERS IN SCIENTIFIC PUBLISHING
The HighWire with Del Bigtree | March 26, 2026
Newly surfaced documents and reporting are fueling questions about whether a small network of powerful players including Bill Gates, Jeffrey Epstein, and individuals linked to Robert Maxwell’s scientific publishing legacy sought outsized influence over how research is distributed and amplified. Emails, investments, and media-funding ties are being cited as potential indicators of an effort to shape which scientific ideas rise to prominence and which get sidelined. The broader issue: who controls the pipelines of modern science—publishing, PR, and perception—and what transparency is owed to the public when power concentrates behind the scenes.
UK Government Secretly Tracked 25 Million People as Potential EV Owners
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | March 2, 2026
The UK government spent two years tracking 25 million mobile devices to build a picture of who drives electric cars. Not suspects or criminals. Just ordinary people whose browsing history mentioned EVs often enough to flag them as worth following.
The Department for Transport paid telecoms company O2 £600,000 ($809,000) to run the operation. According to the Telegraph, O2 trawled through its customers’ web browsing histories and app records, flagging anyone who visited an EV-related site at least once a month across two or more months.
That pool extended beyond O2’s own customers to include people on Tesco Mobile, GiffGaff, and Virgin Mobile, networks that run on O2’s infrastructure and whose users had no idea their data was being packaged and sold to a government agency.
Once flagged as a “potential EV owner,” your physical movements were traced across the country. London, the North-West, and the East of England received particular attention.
The techniques are standard in serious organized crime investigations. The DfT applied them to people buying environmentally friendly cars.
Andy Palmer, former executive at Nissan and Aston Martin, put it plainly: “I’m told it’s anonymized and aggregated, and that may well satisfy legal thresholds. But legality and legitimacy are not the same thing.” He added: “If you erode public trust in how that data is gathered, you undermine the very transition you are trying to accelerate.”
The idea of “anonymized” data means very little.
The surveillance ran for two years before the DfT quietly admitted defeat in April 2024, conceding that “mobile data cannot directly be used to provide information around charging behaviour or travel time.”
The program ended not because anyone questioned whether mass tracking of innocent people was appropriate, but because the data turned out to be useless for its stated purpose.
Civil servants from the DfT and Treasury were simultaneously exploring new EV taxes to replace fuel duty revenue. The people being surveilled were doing exactly what government policy encouraged them to do.
Conservative MP Sir David Davis drew the obvious conclusion: “It’s an object lesson in why you can’t trust the state with unfettered access to people’s information, because they’ve obviously taken this information without people’s permission with the objective of disadvantaging them, either by tax or other policy matters. If they’ll do it on this, with people who are doing what the government wants in policy terms, namely, pursuing green policies, what on Earth will they do elsewhere?”
The EV surveillance program wasn’t a one-off. During the earlier days of the COVID saga, the government ran a parallel operation, this time tracking people who showed up to get vaccinated.
Researchers funded through the Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Behaviors used mobile phone location data covering one in ten British people, without their knowledge or consent, to analyze behavioral changes after vaccination.
From that pool, they selected over 4,200 vaccinated individuals and tracked their movements through call data records, analyzing how far they traveled on vaccination day and whether they went straight home afterward.
The government was monitoring where citizens went after receiving a government-administered medical intervention, and chose not to tell anyone.
Von der Leyen warns Hungary: We have ways of making you talk
By Finian Cunningham | Strategic Culture Foundation | February 26, 2026
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen arrived in Kiev this week empty-handed, and she was pissed. She had been planning to mark the fourth anniversary of the Ukraine war on February 24 with a new €90 billion loan to prop up the corrupt Kiev regime.
At the last minute, Hungary announced that it was vetoing the “Ukraine Support Loan.” So, von der Leyen, the former German defense minister and arch Russophobe, had nothing to show the puppet regime. The big anniversary occasion was an embarrassing flop. Hungary was accused of “betraying” European solidarity.
Putting a brave face on the debacle, von der Leyen made a promise, with menacing tone, about delivering the €90 bn “one way or another.” She said: “Let me be clear, we have different options, and we will use them.”
Those options would seem to include inciting regime change in Budapest. Hungary is going to the polls on April 12 for parliamentary elections. It is no secret that the European Union leadership would dearly like to see incumbent Prime Minister Viktor Orbán being turned out of office, and replaced by Péter Magyar, of the opposition Tisza party, who is more amenable to Brussels’ policy of supporting the Kiev regime in the proxy war against Russia.
Orbán’s government vetoed the €90 bn loan – 60 per cent of which is for military aid – because it accuses the Kiev regime of blocking vital oil supplies to Hungary. Slovakia has also joined Budapest in making the accusation. Both countries claim that Ukraine is using energy “blackmail” simply because they refuse to discontinue buying oil supplies from Russia, and because they are opposed to the ongoing war.
On January 27, Russian oil supplies to Hungary and Slovakia transiting Ukraine via the Drushba pipeline were suddenly stopped. The Kiev regime claims that the pipe was hit by a Russian drone.
However, Hungary’s Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó has bluntly accused Ukraine of lying. He disputes that a Russian attack on the infrastructure even took place. It doesn’t make sense that Russia would harm its customers.
The suspicion is that the Ukrainian regime is using a purported Russian strike as a pretext to cut off the oil supply. The suspicion is deepened by the fact that the Kiev regime has refused requests by Hungary and Slovakia for their inspectors to assess the alleged technical damage. And neither is the EU leadership putting any pressure on Kiev to prove its claims of Russian sabotage.
Ukraine’s nominal president, Vladimir Zelensky, who is mired in allegations of massive fraud, financial corruption, and racketeering, has for a long time been threatening to cut off Russian oil supplies to Hungary and Slovakia. He accuses Budapest and Bratislava of supporting Russia’s war machine by buying its oil. Hungary and Slovakia say that it is their sovereign right to continue obtaining vital energy imports from Russia. The Soviet-era Drushba (“Friendship) pipeline has been supplying Europe since 1964.
The European Union has also been pressuring Hungary and Slovakia to terminate the purchase of Russian crude oil and get in line with the rest of Europe to source alternative, more expensive American energy exports.
Last year, Zelenksy delivered on his threats when the NATO-backed Kiev regime bombed sections of the Drushba pipeline in Russian territory. Those attacks temporarily disrupted supply to Hungary and Slovakia. At the time, the European Union leadership did not condemn the Ukrainian attacks. In other words, Von der Leyen and the Brussels administration were effectively siding with a non-EU member that was harming the interests of two member nations. That indifference was tantamount to greenlighting more sabotage attacks.
The Kiev regime has a record of using attacks on energy as a political weapon against Hungary and Slovakia. It is therefore logical that it has taken such practice to a new level by blocking infrastructure that it can easily control on its own territory. There is no need to bomb the Drushba pipeline in Russia, hundreds of kilometers away. The Kiev regime can handily turn off the pumps of the pipeline section running through its territory – and then blame Russia for “drone strikes”.
Hungary and Slovakia have both accused Zelensky of “slow-walking” the alleged repairs to the pipeline. Zelensky claims that the repairs can’t be carried out because Russia keeps attacking the repair crews.
The Kiev regime has a habit of lying. It has been claiming that Russia is shelling the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant under its control, when in reality it is the Kiev regime that has been carrying out the attacks, which Moscow has condemned as “nuclear blackmail”. Again, the European Union has indulged Kiev’s lies by ignoring the blatant evidence.
On the energy blackmail against Hungary and Slovakia, the knock-on effect has been a growing shortage of fuel and increasing prices for energy and transport.
Hungary’s European Affairs Minister Janos Boka has accused Ukraine and the European Union of deliberately disrupting oil supply to influence the upcoming election. He said: “Ukraine has clearly been reaching for the energy weapon for political reasons, interfering in the ongoing Hungarian elections… to create uncertainty and chaos, and thereby helping the [opposition, pro-EU] Tisza party to power.”
At a closed-door summit in Brussels this week for EU foreign ministers, it was notable that Ukraine’s top diplomat, Andrii Sybiha, was afforded the extraordinary privilege of being permitted to join the conference via video link. How is it that a non-EU member is allowed to participate in a private ministerial summit?
Hungary’s Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó reportedly complained that EU foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, prevented him from grilling the Ukrainian on the specific damage to the Drushba pipeline. Szijjártó said that the “mumbling response” from the Ukrainian official and his abrupt disconnection from the summit demonstrated guilty responsibility.
What the whole saga illustrates is the dictatorship that has emerged in the European Union. Countries like Hungary and Slovakia are not allowed to have independent positions on their energy trade or their opposition to the war in Ukraine.
The Kiev regime is using the disruption of vital energy supply to EU members as a form of blackmail to coerce those members into handing over tens of billions of euros to prolong a bloody conflict, a conflict that could spiral into a nuclear world war. And the EU leadership is effectively supporting this terrorist tactic against its own members to enforce subordination.
When von der Leyen warns that “we have other options,” the inimical image conjured up is that of a Gestapo interrogator twirling pliers in hand.
The strategic defeat of Russia is paramount for the European Russophobic elites, even if it means gouging out the democratic rights of its own member states and endangering international peace.
Female Iranian academic sentenced to 4 years in prison in France over protesting Israel’s genocide in Gaza

Press TV – February 26, 2026
An Iranian academic woman in France has been sentenced to four years in prison after she protested Israel’s genocide in the besieged Gaza Strip, with a permanent ban on her entry into the European country.
A court in France on Thursday, sentenced Iranian citizen Mahdieh Esfandiari, who had been detained on alleged charges of “public defense of terrorism,” to four years in prison, France 24 reported.
According to the court ruling, Esfandiari, a linguist and French language graduate, received a four-year sentence, three years of which were suspended and one year to be served.
The 39-year-old Iranian citizen had previously spent eight months in pretrial detention before being released under conditional terms.
The court also permanently barred Esfandiari from entering French territory.
Esfandiari graduated from Lumière University, where she worked as a professor, translator, and interpreter. She has also been a prominent pro-Palestinian activist with a significant online presence.
Her arrest last year came amid a crackdown in the United States and other Western countries targeting scholars, students, and activists who opposed Israeli genocide and advocate for peace, both on campuses and in public spaces.
The Paris Prosecutor’s Office charged the Iranian academic with “apologie du terrorisme” over Telegram posts that allegedly supported the Hamas-led Operation Al-Aqsa Flood against Israel in October 2023.
