Israeli forces arrest Al Mayadeen bureau chief Nasser al-Lahham in West Bank
By Al Mayadeen | July 7, 2025
Israeli occupation forces arrested Nasser al-Lahham, director of Al Mayadeen’s bureau in occupied Palestine, on Monday, during a pre-dawn raid on his home in Beit Lahm, southern West Bank.
Local sources reported that the arrest was accompanied by deliberate acts of vandalism, as soldiers stormed al-Lahham’s residence, smashing furniture and seizing personal mobile phones belonging to him and his family.
Exclusive sources informed Al Mayadeen that the Israeli security service, Shin Bet, is directly responsible for the arrest of al-Lahham in the occupied West Bank.
According to the sources, Shin Bet officers specifically targeted al-Lahham’s broadcasting studio during the raid and actively searched for electronic equipment and media devices linked to his journalistic work.
In a related development, the Israeli occupation extended al-Lahham’s detention until Thursday and has referred his case to the Ofer military court, located west of Ramallah, for a detention hearing. The move signals a potentially prolonged legal process against one of Palestine’s most prominent media figures.
Wider context
The arrest sparked widespread condemnation from Palestinian political and media circles. Palestinian political activist Sinan Shaqdeh told Al Mayadeen that “the arrest of journalist Nasser al-Lahham carries several implications, most notably an effort to target Al Mayadeen Network for conveying a narrative that challenges the Israeli version of events surrounding the ongoing genocide (in Gaza).”
This latest move comes as part of a broader, systematic campaign targeting journalists and media operations in occupied Palestine. In late October 2023, Israeli forces raided al-Lahham’s home, assaulting his wife and children, conducting an intrusive search, and detaining his two sons, Basil and Basel.
Meanwhile, Al Mayadeen’s correspondent Hanaa Mahamid continues to face repeated threats by Israeli authorities in an attempt to suppress independent media coverage from the occupied territories.
The Israeli government has renewed its ban on Al Mayadeen’s operation in occupied Palestine, confiscated its broadcasting equipment, and blocked its websites, in a crackdown against the network, amid the continued genocide in the Gaza Strip and the broad assault on the West Bank.
Al-Lahham’s arrest is an attempt at suppressing the press: Fatah
Munther al-Hayek, spokesperson for the Fatah Movement, told Al Mayadeen that the Israeli occupation’s arrest of Nasser al-Lahham aims to suppress press freedom and intimidate journalists.
Al-Hayek added, “What Israel is doing in the Palestinian territories is happening with a green light from the United States.”
He also emphasized that the free press’s coverage of Israeli massacres in Gaza has unsettled Netanyahu’s government, prompting it to resort to repressive and terror tactics.
Protesters in London defy ban to rally in support of Palestine Action
Palestine Action supporters outside London’s High Court in London, July 4, 2025. (Reuters)
Press TV – July 5, 2025
In a direct challenge to the British government’s new ban, protesters have gathered in central London to show solidarity with the pro-Palestinian campaign group, Palestine Action.
The group, which uses direct action against Israeli weapons factories in the UK and their supply chain, was officially designated a “terrorist organization” after a late-night legal bid to delay the move failed on Friday. The proscription came into force on Saturday.
Under the new legislation, membership of or public support for the group is now a criminal offense in the UK, punishable by up to 14 years in prison.
Protesters on Saturday gathered at Parliament Square, defying a warning from the Metropolitan Police, who said expressing support for the group “is a criminal offence.”
The demonstration, organized by campaign group Defend Our Juries, however, saw protesters holding signs and chanting in support of the pro-Palestine group.
Pictures from the rally showed protesters holding placards reading, “I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action” in Westminster.
Police had warned that chanting slogans, wearing clothing, or displaying flags and signs in support of the group could lead to arrest under the Terrorism Act.
The Met said more than 20 people have been arrested in London.
In a letter addressed to Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, protesters said that they “refuse to be cowed into silence by your order.”
Palestine Action has focused much of its campaign on Elbit Systems UK, which it accuses of manufacturing and supplying weapons to the Israeli military amid the regime’s genocidal war on Gaza.
In its most recent action, activists stormed Guardtech, a subcontractor the group says provides “essential clean room services” to Instro Precision—a subsidiary of Elbit Systems, Israel’s largest arms producer.
Protesters blocked the company’s only entrance on Wednesday and covered it in red paint, symbolizing the blood shed by the Israeli regime in the Gaza Strip.
Palestine Action says Instro Precision cannot operate without Guardtech’s services, which are used to maintain the controlled environments necessary for producing radar kits and targeting systems.
Reacting to the ban on the group, a spokesperson for Palestine Action said, in a statement, “While London is rushing through Parliament absurd legislation to proscribe Palestine Action, the real terrorism is being committed in Gaza.”
It said that the activist group “affirms that direct action is necessary in the face of Israel’s ongoing crimes against humanity of genocide, apartheid and occupation, and to end British facilitation of those crimes.”
HHS to ‘Revolutionize’ Vaccine Injury Compensation, RFK Jr. Tells Tucker Carlson
By Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D. | The Defender | July 1, 2025
Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. sat down yesterday with Tucker Carlson to share an update on his mission to end the skyrocketing rate of autism in U.S. kids.
By the end of their nearly 90-minute conversation, the two had covered a slew of topics, including pharmaceutical ads on TV, increasing compensation for the vaccine-injured, and the need for a “truth commission” to uncover who and what caused the COVID-19 pandemic.
Carlson, who last year left FOX News after being the network’s “most popular host,” now runs “The Tucker Carlson Show.” He broke his interview with Kennedy into five “chapters”:
- Uncovering the Reason for Skyrocketing Rates of Autism
- Is It Possible to End the Corrupt Relationship Between Big Pharma and Corporate Media?
- Will There Be Compensation for the Vaccine-Injured?
- RFK’s Firing of So-Called “Experts”
- The Real Reason Fauci Got a Pardon
Below are highlights from each.
HHS will do honest, open research on autism and vaccines
In the past, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) failed to honestly and adequately research the possible link between vaccines and autism, Kennedy said.
The CDC ignored recommendations from the Institute of Medicine to do a “litany” of studies to get at the issue, Kennedy said, including animal models, observational studies, bench studies and epidemiological studies.
“But what we’re going to do now,” he said, “is we’re going to do all the kinds of studies that the Institute of Medicine originally recommended.”
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) in April announced a new research program to study what causes autism and why autism diagnoses are on the rise.
NIH will make data from Medicare and Medicaid available to independent scientists for analysis. Data from the Vaccine Safety Datalink — a huge repository for health records — will also be used, Kennedy said.
Raw data will be made available to the public whenever possible, Kennedy said.
“Something new that we’re bringing in is that every study will be replicated,” he added.
Big Pharma ads fail to benefit patients and doctors
Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Angus King (I-Maine) last month introduced federal legislation to end direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising.
Kennedy didn’t reference the bill or say he supported a ban on such ads. However, he outlined several reasons why pharmaceutical marketing on mainstream media is bad for public health.
Many ads are misleading, he told Carlson. “Even the music and the video, the photos that they show … it’s sending a message that if you take this drug, you’re going to be riding jet skis and playing volleyball and water skiing and have a great-looking spouse.”
Meanwhile, the ads feature the most expensive version of the drug rather than the generic version.
“They’re not going to advertise the generics because they’re not making any money,” Kennedy said. “So they’re advertising the ones that are the highest profit margins for them.”
Plus, the U.S. taxpayer bears the brunt of the cost while the drug company profits. Kennedy explained:
“Normally, if you see an advertisement on TV like for Coca-Cola, you then have a choice to go get that and you’re paying out of your pocket for it.
“When somebody buys a pharmaceutical drug, it’s Medicaid and Medicare that are paying for it … it’s the taxpayer. … And we’re paying for the ads because they’re tax-deductible.”
When a patient sees the ad and asks a doctor for the drug, the doctor — who is told by a “corporate bean counter” to limit time with a patient to only 11 minutes — has to choose whether to use the time trying to talk the patient out of the drug, Kennedy said. But if the doctor does that, the patient likely goes away unsatisfied.
Or the doctor could just say, “All right, you want this prescription? I’ll write it for you.” Then the patient will be satisfied and come back, Kennedy said. “The doctors hate it. … And nobody thinks that this is good for public health. It is hurting us.”
Kennedy said the censorship of vaccine-related information on social media is also a problem.
The U.S. Supreme Court yesterday denied Children’s Health Defense’s (CHD) petition to hear its censorship case against Meta, the parent company of Facebook.
CHD sued Meta in August 2020 and filed an amended complaint in November 2020, alleging that government actors partnered with Facebook to censor CHD’s speech — particularly speech related to vaccines and COVID-19 — that should have been protected under the First Amendment. The company deplatformed CHD from Facebook and Instagram in August 2022 and has not reinstated the accounts.
Censorship of scientific results that are critical of vaccines is also a problem, Kennedy added.
Kennedy’s plans to expand vaccine injury compensation program
The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, which granted legal immunity to vaccine makers and created the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, also made it difficult for anyone injured by a vaccine to obtain compensation.
“We just brought a guy in this week who is going to be revolutionizing the [National] Vaccine Injury Compensation program,” Kennedy said.
“We’re looking at ways to enlarge the program so that COVID vaccine-injured people can be compensated … we’re looking at ways to enlarge the statute of limitations,” Kennedy told Carlson.
It’s currently limited to three years. “A lot of people don’t discover their injuries till after that,” Kennedy said.
The program has other flaws, including that it has no discovery process, no rules of evidence and historically had corrupt leadership.
“We’re going to change all that,” Kennedy said. “I’ve brought in a team this week that is starting to work on that.”
Kennedy also said HHS will use AI (artificial intelligence) to track vaccine injuries more effectively. The agency plans to use AI in other ways, too, such as speeding up drug approval processes and detecting fraud.
Why CDC vaccine advisory committee needed a clean sweep
Kennedy defended his recent move to fire all members of the CDC’s vaccine advisory panel, saying the board had become “a sock puppet for the industry that it was supposed to regulate.”
On June 11, Kennedy named eight researchers and physicians to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), two days after removing all 17 of the previous ACIP members.
“This was a long time coming, Tucker,” Kennedy said. He gave an example to illustrate the kind of financial conflict of interest that had plagued the board for years.
Years ago, the committee approved adding a rotavirus vaccine to the childhood immunization schedule, he said.
Four of the five committee members had “direct financial interest in the rotavirus vaccine,” Kennedy said. “They were working for the companies that made the vaccine, or they were receiving grants to do clinical trials on that vaccine.”
Within a year, that specific rotavirus vaccine was linked to “disastrous” disease in kids and pulled from the market. It was replaced by a different rotavirus vaccine that then-committee member Dr. Paul Offit had helped develop.
“Then [Offit] and his business partners, Dr. Stanley Plotkin, and a couple of other people, sold that vaccine to Merck for $186 million,” Kennedy recalled.
According to Kennedy, Offit told Newsweek that he won the lottery. “It’s been said of him that he voted himself rich, so that kind of conflict was typical on that committee.”
Could a ‘truth commission’ hold Fauci accountable?
Carlson and Kennedy discussed the origins of COVID-19 and the possible reasons for Dr. Anthony Fauci’s presidential pardon.
Just before leaving office, former President Joe Biden preemptively pardoned Fauci. The pardon, retroactive to Jan. 1, 2014, addresses “any offenses” Fauci committed during this period, including in his former capacities as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, member of the White House COVID-19 Response Team and chief medical adviser to Biden.
When Carlson pressed Kennedy to comment on Fauci’s motivations for funding coronavirus research in China, Kennedy said he tried to avoid speculation.
That’s why in his book, “The Real Anthony Fauci,” he reports only what Fauci did, not Fauci’s possible motivations, he said.
Carlson said, “It sounds like Fauci is beyond the reach of the law at this point.”
Kennedy responded, “Yeah, I think generally, unless there was a truth commission, you know, which they did in South Africa. They did it in Central America after the 1980s wars there, and they were very, very helpful to those societies. I think we should probably do something like that now.”
Kennedy explained how a truth commission works:
“You have a commission that hears testimony on what exactly happened. Anybody who comes and volunteers to testify truthfully is then given immunity from prosecution. But so that at least the public knows who did what. …
“People who are called and don’t take that deal and perjure themselves, they then can be prosecuted criminally.”
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.
Ofcom seeks powers to preemptively block viral content, censor potentially illegal speech, and mandate broad Digital ID
By Cam Wakefield | Reclaim The Net | July 1, 2025
The UK’s increasingly controversial Office of Communications, Ofcom, is charting a path that could reshape the internet as we know it, and not for the better.
Under the banner of the Online Safety Act, the regulator is proposing a sweeping expansion of its authority that, if enacted, would hand it unprecedented influence over what we see, share and say online.
Part of Ofcom’s plan is the goal of preventing illegal content from gaining traction.
Platforms would be required to block material that even appears to be unlawful from being recommended by algorithms until it’s reviewed by a human moderator.
The idea, on paper, is to stop harmful content from “going viral.”
In practice, it risks creating a system where lawful speech is caught in digital limbo, held back by automated systems that err on the side of caution.
Ofcom frames these proposals as a necessary response to modern online threats.
It talks about “highly effective age assurance,” a term that sounds innocuous enough but points toward invasive digital ID checks.
The aim is to ensure that children aren’t exposed to harmful material, but the solution would come at the cost of privacy and anonymity for everyone, two pillars of an open internet.
This new regime would compel tech firms to act as frontline enforcers of ill-defined standards of legality, long before a court has had a chance to weigh in.
In times of crisis; riots, terror attacks, or other major incidents; platforms would be under pressure to throttle spikes in content rapidly.
That effectively puts Ofcom in the position of deciding, in real-time, what the public is allowed to see.
One of the more troubling proposals targets livestreaming; a tool that has become vital for journalists, activists, and artists.
All of it would be wrapped in tighter age verification systems that threaten to chill participation and expression.
The regulator also wants to see wider deployment of technologies like perceptual hash matching and automated tools; not just for known illegal content, but for material that might be illegal or harmful.
That includes everything from suicide-related posts to fraudulent schemes. While the intent is understandable, the risk of overreach is significant.
Without proper safeguards, lawful speech could be swept into censorship systems, and surveillance could become embedded in the core of our digital infrastructure.
Oliver Griffiths, who leads Ofcom’s Online Safety Group, summed up the regulator’s stance: “We’re holding platforms to account and launching swift enforcement action where we have concerns.”
It’s a statement that highlights how determined Ofcom is to push these changes through, no matter the consequences.
The public has until 20 October 2025 to respond to Ofcom’s consultation.
Given the political climate, the proposals seem likely to pass with little resistance.
But if they do, the UK’s online environment may come to be defined not by the free exchange of ideas, but by cautious, preemptive censorship and intrusive oversight; all in the name of safety.
AfD ban leaps closer with likely election of new far-left judge to Germany’s top court
Remix News | July 2, 2025
Frauke Brosius-Gersdorf, a lawyer described as far-left, is poised to become a new judge at the Federal Constitutional Court, Germany’s top court, and it is very bad news for Germany’s conservatives. This new development could significantly increase the chances that a ban on the anti-immigration Alternative for Germany (AfD) party actually passes through the court.
The governing coalition, the Social Democrats (SPD) and the Christian Democrats (CDU), has agreed on the SPD candidate, who has gained public attention for her strong opinions. The news comes after the SPD voted on an AfD ban in a unanimous motion at the end of their three-day party congress last week.
Brosius-Gersdorf is on record that she wants a ban on the AfD, saying: “We are a resilient democracy. We have safeguards against anti-constitutional parties.”
A year ago, on the ZDF talk show “Markus Lanz” on July 25, 2024, Brosius-Gersdorf controversially expressed regret that an AfD ban “would not eliminate its supporters.”
When Lanz, puzzled, asked, “You don’t want to eliminate people?”, she replied, “Of course not.” However, she insisted on the possibility of depriving AfD members of their basic rights, including the right to be elected, stating, “We have the ability to deprive individuals of their basic rights.”
Following her expected appointment to Karlsruhe, where the Constitutional Court is headquartered, Brosius-Gersdorf is also considered a frontrunner for the position of President of the Federal Constitutional Court. That means the court, made up of 16 judges, would be led by the far-left judge, which could prove catastrophic for not only the AfD, but also present a major problem for libertarians, supporters of free speech, and social conservatives.
Governments come and go, but Brosius-Gersdorf will be in her position for a very long time, and she will wield enormous power.
Beyond her stance on the AfD, she was a strong advocate for mandatory Covid-19 vaccination, arguing in 2021 that the German constitution, the Basic Law, already suggested that this would be a necessity. She wrote, “One can even consider whether there is now a constitutional obligation to introduce mandatory vaccination.” Furthermore, she stated, “It is the state’s responsibility to effectively protect the vast majority of the population, who have been voluntarily vaccinated, from their health (…) continuing to be threatened by the unvaccinated.”
Notably, it turned out that vaccination did not stop the spread of the illness, a contention by numerous health authorities that turned out to be absolutely false.
Her statements about mandatory vaccination have already led CDU Bundestag member Saskia Ludwig to declare Brosius-Gersdorf “unelectable” on Tuesday.
There are other areas where Brosius-Gersdorf could prove a bane to conservatives and the right in Germany, including on social issues.
The designated constitutional judge has also called for the German Basic Law to adopt “gender-appropriate” language, as reported by German media outlet Apollo News. She argued that the generic masculine, as standard language, leads to “a conceptual underrepresentation of women,” and that the state is obligated to “choose a form of expression that does justice to the fundamental rights of women and persons of diverse genders, as well as to the constitution.”
This has to do with the German language, which has masculine and feminine words, and in many cases, there is an emphasis on the masculine form, which many German feminists reject as outdated.
It remains unclear why the CDU would back this candidate. Following protests from the SPD and the Greens, the CDU/CSU withdrew their nomination of conservative Federal Administrative Court judge Robert Seegmüller for the Federal Constitutional Court. They are now putting forward Federal Labor Court judge Günter Spinner. The SPD is also nominating Munich professor Ann-Katrin Kaufhold. For these candidates to be elected, the coalition factions, the SPD and the CDU/CSU, require a two-thirds majority, meaning the Greens and the Left Party must also agree.
Brosius-Gersdorf represents a serious obstacle to not only the AfD, but also the CDU on a range of issues. The CDU, for instance, has taken issue with gendered language, which is a hot cultural topic in Germany. If the CDU backs this candidate, it is likely to pay the price for years to come.
Before any potential AfD ban, the Bundestag must first vote to pass a ban proposal. So far, the CDU has rejected such a ban, with Chancellor Merz stating that it reeked of eliminating a political rival. Other top CDU officials have rejected a ban. However, if the CDU comes around to the idea, the Constitutional Court may be much more willing to pass such a ban under the potential leadership of Brosius-Gersdorf.
Denmark subjects 18-year-old females to the draft starting July 1
RT | July 1, 2025
Women in Denmark are now subject to conscription, following a change to the relevant law made by the country’s parliament a few weeks ago.
The move comes as NATO, of which Denmark is a member, increases its military readiness, citing a perceived threat from Russia after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. At the bloc’s summit in The Hague last week, member states agreed to ramp up defense spending.
In May, the European Union approved a €150 billion ($171 billion) borrowing plan to support its own military buildup.
The Kremlin has consistently dismissed allegations of hostile intent toward Western nations as “nonsense” and fearmongering.
The newly adopted Danish legislation mandates “full equality between men and women in relation to military service.” It requires that “women who turn 18 on or after 1 July 2025 will have to… draw a [draft] lottery number and thus could be ordered to serve military service if there are not enough volunteers.” Female conscripts will serve under the same conditions as men.
The bill also extends the mandatory service period from four to eleven months, according to media reports.
Denmark’s armed forces rely on both volunteers and conscripts, who are called up when volunteer numbers fall short. Roughly 4,700 Danes completed military service in 2024, with women accounting for approximately 24% of that figure.
Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen unveiled plans to conscript women in March, framing the decision as part of a push for “full equality between the sexes.”
Latvia, another NATO member, is planning to conscript women by 2028. It reintroduced mandatory service in 2023 after scrapping it in 2006.
Norway and Sweden have already implemented gender-neutral conscription, in 2015 and 2018 respectively.
German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius has also proposed reinstating the draft for men, which was abolished in 2011.
Israel kills more Palestinian journalists in Gaza
Press TV – June 30, 2025
Israel continues to target Palestinian journalists covering the regime’s atrocities in Gaza, killing a number of them in Gaza City.
“Several Palestinian journalists were killed and others injured in an Israeli airstrike targeting al-Baqa Café in western Gaza City, where they had been working to upload news reports,” Rami Abdu, the founder of Chairman of Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor, said in a tweet on Monday.
Medical sources said at least 33 people were killed and dozens of others injured in the attack.
Most of the victims were “journalists, artists, and social media activists”, as the place is one of the few remaining internet access points in the strip,” Abdu added, amid internet blackout.
“It’s increasingly clear that Israel is deliberately targeting data upload hubs used by journalists to transmit reports and images.”
Among the victims was Ismail Abu Hatab, a photojournalist who worked with several media platforms and various outlets, Gaza’s Government Media Office said on Telegram.
The office “condemned in the strongest terms the systematic targeting, killing, and assassination of Palestinian journalists by the Israeli occupation”.
Since this morning, hospital sources said at least 80 people have been killed in Israeli strikes on Gaza.
Sources told Al-Jazeera that those killed include 57 Palestinians in northern Gaza, and 15 aid seekers near the so-called aid distribution centers north of the southern city of Rafah.
Israel launched the campaign of genocide in Gaza on October 7, 2023. It has killed over 56,530 Palestinians there so far, according to the health ministry of Gaza.
‘Every American Wearing a Wearable’ Is Not a Vision We Share
By Children’s Health Defense EMR & Wireless Team | The Defender | June 26, 2025
During recent congressional testimony, U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. stated:
“We’re about to launch one of the biggest advertising campaigns in HHS history to encourage Americans to use wearables … my vision is that every American is wearing a wearable within four years.”
Kennedy was responding to a question about whether consumers should continue to have access to wearables. He explained that wearables allow users to constantly track in real-time how food and lifestyle choices affect their health metrics. He also claimed that wearables are key to the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) agenda.
We agree that people should be able to monitor their health in innovative ways using the technology they choose. But we do not think the federal government should try to push wearables on every American.
A wearable is an electronic device — such as a smartwatch, fitness tracker or smart ring — worn on the body. It’s made up of dozens of sensors and wireless technologies that continuously collect, monitor and transmit biometric and other sensitive data.
“We do not share this vision,” said Miriam Eckenfels, director of the Children’s Health Defense (CHD) Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) & Wireless Program. “Quite the contrary, we oppose governmental pressure to incentivize the widespread use of wearables. They pose serious health risks, especially to children, and they threaten privacy.”
Wireless technologies, including wearables, have clear and well-documented harms. These devices continuously emit radiofrequency (RF) radiation in direct contact with the body for long periods of time.
They also have multiple transmitters/receivers (Bluetooth, Wi-Fi and cellular), operating on several different radio bands. Cumulative and long-term exposures have known significant risks.
RF radiation exposure is associated with a wide range of adverse health effects, including “increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being.”
A systematic review commissioned by the World Health Organization (WHO) last month concluded that there is “high certainty” evidence that cellphone radiation exposure causes two types of cancer in animals.
Higher-frequency millimeter wave (MMW) transmissions used in 5G cellular networks are also known to produce eye damage and skin burns. An industry study by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) concluded that overexposure to MMW is expected to produce burns “like those produced when a person touches hot objects or flames.”
Children, pregnant women at even greater risk
Children have smaller bodies, developing nervous systems, more conductive tissue and longer lifetimes of exposure compared to adults, putting them at even greater risk of harm from radiation exposure. Their cells are dividing and growing at a higher rate, so DNA damage is magnified.
Other vulnerable populations include pregnant women, and people with implanted devices, chronic health conditions and Electromagnetic Radiation Syndrome (EMR-S).
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued official guidance cautioning that individuals with pacemakers and other implanted medical devices should keep wearables like smartwatches at a distance due to potential interference and malfunction. Manufacturers like Apple also include guidelines and warnings for wearables.
This highlights a broader point: wearables are not safe or suitable for “every American.”
In 2021, CHD won a landmark case against the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), in which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that the FCC had failed to consider extensive evidence of harm from wireless radiation.
The court found that the FCC did not consider peer-reviewed scientific research on the harmful effects of wireless radiation exposure on children, the brain and nervous system, male fertility and people with EMR-S.
The ruling specifically cited the agency’s failure to address studies showing oxidative stress, DNA damage, and the health risks from modulation and cumulative exposure.
The court also ordered the agency to explain how its limits are protective. Yet almost four years later, the FCC has still not complied.
This ruling validated years of scientific evidence about the harms of wireless technology and confirmed that the public, including wearable users, continues to be actively misguided by industry and government agencies alike.
Biometric data collection raises privacy concerns
Wireless technologies also have extensive and well-documented privacy impacts. They continuously collect biometric data, including heart rate, quality of sleep, blood pressure, cholesterol levels, oxygen levels, calorie burn, sweat gland emissions, hormone levels, body temperature, emotional responses, movement and precise geolocation.
This biometric data is transmitted over the internet and can be used to create an intimate profile of the user’s physical and psychological states. This intimate profile can be made available to employers, medical providers, private corporations, artificial intelligence systems, insurance companies and government entities.
This surveillance infrastructure may lay the groundwork for psychological targeting, predictive modeling, social control and unprecedented intrusions into personal freedom.
These risks cannot be left out of any discussion of so-called “digital health.”
“We are eager to learn more about Secretary Kennedy’s full intent regarding wearables,” said Eckenfels. “The growing push for widespread adoption of wearables, which exposes users to constant RF radiation in direct contact with the body, is concerning and fundamentally at odds with the values of informed consent, privacy and bodily autonomy that CHD defends.”
Eckenfels added:
“The public deserves radical transparency about wearables’ health and privacy risks. Their use must remain a personal choice and not a public health objective. We do not share — indeed, we oppose — a vision where everyone is subject to constant wireless exposure in direct contact with the body and biometric tracking.
“What amounts to technocratic surveillance should not be normalized, encouraged and promoted at the federal level.”
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
UK arrests 4 in crackdown on Palestine Action over RAF incursion
Al Mayadeen | June 28, 2025
UK counterterrorism authorities have arrested four individuals in connection with a break-in at RAF Brize Norton, reportedly carried out by members of Palestine Action. The incident, which took place last Friday, involved activists entering the Royal Air Force base in Oxfordshire and spray painting on two military aircraft in protest against Britain’s support for “Israel” and its ongoing genocide in Gaza.
South East Counter Terrorism Police confirmed the arrests, stating that a 29-year-old woman without a fixed address, along with two men aged 36 and 24, were detained on “terrorism-related grounds”. A fourth suspect, a 41-year-old woman, was arrested on suspicion of “assisting an offender.”
Authorities said the three were being held under suspicion of committing, preparing, or instigating acts of terrorism, as defined under Section 41 of the Terrorism Act 2000.
Government crackdown on pro-Palestine activism
Following the arrests, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper announced her intention to designate Palestine Action as a proscribed organization under the UK’s Terrorism Act. If implemented, the designation would make it illegal to support, join, or promote the group, an escalation that has drawn concern from human rights advocates and civil liberties organizations.
On the same day, hundreds gathered in Trafalgar Square to express solidarity with the group, warning against the criminalization of activism aimed at opposing the UK’s complicity in supplying weapons to “Israel”.
In response, Palestine Action issued a statement via X, condemning the government’s treatment of the protest. “Despite us not being proscribed, the state is treating red paint on warplanes as an act of terrorism,” the group stated. It further revealed that the arrested activists were being held in solitary confinement without charge for several days.
Authorities moved quickly to suppress related demonstrations, dispersing planned rallies outside Parliament and pushing protesters into Trafalgar Square. Several arrests were made, with the Metropolitan Police citing public order risks. Meanwhile, counter-terrorism police have launched a broader security review across UK military installations.
Wider context
Palestine Action, founded in 2020 by British-Palestinian activist Huda Ammori and co-founder Richard Barnard, is known for its confrontational yet non-lethal tactics aimed at arms companies tied to “Israel’s” military-industrial complex. Previous campaigns have led to the temporary shutdown of Elbit Systems-linked factories in Oldham and Tamworth, as well as disrupted contracts with Israeli weapons suppliers.
Legal experts have raised doubts about whether Palestine Action meets the statutory requirements for proscription under the Terrorism Act 2000, which include posing a real threat to national security or British citizens. Critics argue that the group’s actions, while disruptive, remain rooted in civil disobedience rather than terrorism.
The proposed ban has renewed scrutiny of UK-“Israel” cooperation, with campaigners pointing to past evidence of coordination between British counterterrorism units and the Israeli embassy. Concerns are growing that this measure could set a precedent for further repression of pro-Palestine activism.
Families of detained activists face deepening uncertainty, as support efforts, ranging from legal aid to court appearances, could be criminalized. Foreign nationals involved in the group may also face deportation or visa revocation if the ban is enacted.
Washington’s unprecedented political war on Europe
By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – June 27, 2025
A dramatic U.S. political broadside against Europe signals not just strained transatlantic ties, but a deeper ideological rupture — one that could push the EU toward redefining itself as a fully autonomous global actor.
Notwithstanding tensions surrounding US tariffs on the EU, the future and role of NATO, and the conflict in Ukraine, US-EU tensions are escalating to an outright political and ideological rivalry. Washington’s political attacks on European states and their policies mark a significant shift towards the end of transatlantic unity and an opportunity for the EU to rediscover itself.
Washington’s political attacks on Europe
On May 27th, 2025, the US State Department published an essay that could go down in history as Washington’s charge sheet on Europe, expressing the depth of contention and resentment colouring the Trump administration’s ties with the continent currently. However, once set along this path of confrontation, there may not be a return to normal, transatlantic ties in the foreseeable future. The essay begins with narrating the history and depth of US-Europe ties. Immediately afterward, however, it shockingly mentions what was unthinkable until a few years ago. The US State Department sees Europe as a ‘different world’, different from what the US itself (supposedly) represents. To quote the letter: “What endures [in Europe] instead is an aggressive campaign against Western civilization itself. Across Europe, governments have weaponized political institutions against their own citizens and against our shared heritage. Far from strengthening democratic principles, Europe has devolved into a hotbed of digital censorship, mass migration, restrictions on religious freedom, and numerous other assaults on democratic self-governance”.
Liberalism is Bad
It is not just European politics facing Washington’s assault; it is also the underlying liberal political order of Europe itself. The letter accuses Europe of restricting political space and criminalising dissenting political voices. The reason is the failure of liberalism, according to the letter. “Our concerns are not partisan but principled. The suppression of speech, facilitation of mass migration, targeting of religious expression, and undermining of electoral choice threatens the very foundation of the transatlantic partnership. A Europe that replaces its spiritual and cultural roots, that treats traditional values as dangerous relics, and that centralizes power in unaccountable institutions is a Europe less capable of standing firm against external threats and internal decay. To this end, achieving peace in Europe and around the world requires not a rejection of our shared cultural heritage, but a renewal of it”, adds the letter.
This, according to the letter, is not a good sign for the future of US-European ties. It mentions Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who is said to have made clear that “Europe’s democratic backsliding not only impacts European citizens but increasingly affects American security and economic ties, along with the free speech rights of American citizens and companies”.
Beyond Mistrust
This letter reveals many things. Most importantly, it reveals the level of mistrust and gap that now divides the transatlantic world. It is no longer mere tactical disagreements over petty issues. This mistrust has at its roots in the political thinking of the Trump administration. Donald Trump understands the EU as a political arrangement created to “screw” the US. He and his political advisers are now trying to unscrew this arrangement to ‘free’ the US from the decades-old political bonds.
For Europeans, this is a major challenge. A report in the UK-based Financial Times said that Europe “is quickly becoming the latest front in a culture war Trump has unleashed against the bastions of liberalism. Most of his targets — elite universities, government agencies such as USAID, public broadcasters — have been domestic. But the Samson essay shows Maga’s ambitions go much further, and the movement is now prepared to deploy far beyond America’s borders”. According to this report, it is not the EU, which is the real threat to the US, but the US is the biggest threat to Europe itself.
How will Europe respond to this attack, which now has both political and cultural underpinnings? There is little denying that Europe needs to grapple with prospects of a potential ‘de-coupling’ from the US. This de-coupling will create, at least in the immediate future, an urgent need for policy correction on several fronts. From negotiating the trade war with the US—which Europeans will understandably find hard to win—to shared security, the continent needs to change its direction fundamentally from seeking US compliance with the written and unwritten obligations of the transatlantic alliance to totally redefining—and changing—them.
This policy correction requires the EU to do a thorough reassessment of its ties not just with Washington but with Russia and China as well. It needs to reject notions—many of which were fanned out by the Biden administration most recently —of Russia being a security threat and/or Russian expansionism. Instead, it needs to realise that the Trump administration might be its best chance in the last seven decades or so since the end of the Second World War to come out of Washington’s shadow and become a truly autonomous player capable of both defining and defending its interests. In other words, instead of seeking to mend ties with the US to make them ‘normal’, it should further the ‘de-coupling’ and reinforce its continental interests as its own responsibility. There is arguably no alternative for Europe to survive this situation without losing its strength and standing internationally.
Obama Wants Filters Not Freedom
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | June 21, 2025
Barack Obama’s recent appearance at The Connecticut Forum once again revealed a troubling truth: the political establishment is becoming increasingly comfortable with the idea of government-managed speech.
In an extended conversation with historian Heather Cox Richardson, the former president signaled that his tolerance for open discourse ends where his ideological preferences begin.
Amid warnings about the spread of “propaganda” and falsehoods online, Obama floated the notion of imposing “government regulatory constraints” on digital platforms.
His rationale? To counter business models that, in his opinion, elevate “the most hateful voices or the most polarizing voices or the most dangerous, in the sense of inciting violence.”
But it doesn’t take much reading between the lines to see what’s really being proposed: a top-down mechanism to filter speech based on government-approved standards of truth.
This wasn’t framed as a direct assault on the First Amendment, of course. Obama was careful to qualify that such regulations would remain “consistent with the First Amendment.”
But that’s little comfort when the very premise involves the government determining which voices deserve a platform. Once the state takes a role in deciding what is true or acceptable, the line between moderation and censorship evaporates.
Obama’s remarks included a reference to a saying he alleges is attributed to Russian intelligence and later adopted by Steve Bannon: “You just have to flood the zone with so much poop…that at some point people don’t believe anything.”
This, he argued, is the tactic used by bad actors to disorient the public. What he failed to acknowledge is that the antidote to this isn’t more control, but more speech. Free people, given access to a full spectrum of views, are capable of discerning fact from fiction without government supervision.
The real danger isn’t “too much speech.” It’s the increasing desire to place speech under bureaucratic management.
Obama’s suggestion that some speech is too “hateful” or “dangerous” to be left unchecked invites a future where those in power decide what the public is allowed to hear, a vision completely incompatible with a free society.
And we’ve already seen how that plays out.
The Biden administration made repeated efforts to coerce tech companies into censoring dissenting views during the COVID-19 pandemic, flagging opinions that contradicted official narratives even when they later turned out to be correct.
The justification was always the same: protecting people from harm. But in practice, it meant silencing lawful speech and punishing disagreement.
Obama’s proposal echoes that same authoritarian instinct.
The promise of safeguarding the public from falsehoods is used to justify speech controls that would ultimately chill dissent and punish deviation from dominant narratives. And who decides which views are “too hateful” or “too polarizing”? Politicians? Bureaucrats? Tech executives? The moment that power is granted, it will inevitably be abused.
UK seeks to ban Palestine Action over RAF base protest
Al Mayadeen | June 21, 2025
British news outlets on Saturday revealed that the UK government is preparing to ban Palestine Action, a pro-Palestinian direct action group, by classifying it as a terrorist organization. This move, spearheaded by Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, is expected to be announced in a ministerial statement on Monday and will require parliamentary approval. If enacted, the ban would criminalize membership and support for the group under the Terrorism Act 2000.
The proposed proscription follows a high-profile protest at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire, where Palestine Action activists gained access to the military airbase and sprayed red paint on two aircraft. The group described the action as part of a campaign to disrupt the UK’s complicity in “Israel’s” assault on Gaza. “Activists have interrupted Britain’s direct participation in the commission of genocide and war crimes across the Middle East,” the group said.
Video footage released by the group showed two individuals entering the base at night on electric scooters, with one spraying red paint into the engine of a Voyager aircraft, used to transport British leaders and refuel allied jets. A spokesperson for the group declared: “Despite publicly condemning the Israeli government, Britain continues to send military cargo, fly spy planes over Gaza and refuel US and Israeli fighter jets.”
Though the RAF claimed the damage is being assessed and does not expect major operational disruptions, the incident has sparked a wider security review across UK military bases. The government’s response has drawn criticism for targeting activism rather than addressing its own military entanglements.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer condemned the protest as “disgraceful” and labeled it “an act of vandalism,” while counter-terrorism police and the Ministry of Defence continue their investigations.
Disruptive Solidarity
Founded in 2020 by Huda Ammori, a British-Palestinian activist, and Richard Barnard, Palestine Action is known for its non-violent yet disruptive tactics aimed at corporations that profit from the Israeli military-industrial complex.
The group has previously shut down two Elbit Systems-linked arms factories in Oldham and Tamworth and forced companies like Dean Group International to cut contracts with Israeli weapons manufacturers. Their disruptive tactics—ranging from factory occupations and sabotage to sustained divestment pressure, have challenged British institutions to reckon with their role in supplying the machinery of occupation.
Friday’s action at Brize Norton marks one of the group’s most significant actions yet, directly confronting a military base central to the UK’s support operations.
Critics say the proscription is a politically motivated attempt to silence dissent against Britain’s role in arming and supporting “Israel”. “We represent every person who stands for Palestinian liberation. If they want to ban us, they ban us all,” Palestine Action posted on X. The Palestine Solidarity Campaign called the move “outrageous,” defending the group as a non-violent direct action network.
The planned ban raises serious concerns about the criminalization of solidarity with Palestine and the suppression of dissent.
Featured Video
It’s the Occupation, Stupid
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
A superpower and “the world’s sickest warrior state”
By Paul J. Balles | March 8, 2010
Living through five or six major wars has hardened me to what I thought were the extremes of inhuman cruelty and brutality.
Two things made those extremes almost bearable: the brutality always revealed – at least according to the media coverage – the viciousness of the enemy. It was therefore quite understandable when our “brave men and women” pulverized the enemy.
Films of Japanese torturing captive Americans somehow justified holding Japanese Americans in internment camps during World War II; and only a small percentage of Americans found the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki unreasonably vengeful at best, at worst, depraved.
The media giants in America portrayed the North Koreans as barbaric beasts with their captives, quite unlike their southern counterpoints – our allies during the Korean War. No one ever felt the need to explain how the South Koreans were a civilized breed while the North Koreans were absolute savages, at least according to the official line.
In Vietnam, our warriors justifiably (or so the media made us believe) dropped napalm on the North Vietnamese who had the gall to hide in villages and tunnels to ravage our invaders. At least it was accepted practice until some rogue photojournalist filmed a young girl screaming down a Vietnamese road in flames. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- IRGC: Israeli, US universities in region legitimate targets after strikes on Iranian university
- Trump admits Iran hit USS Ford carrier: ‘We ran for our lives’
- Battle for Hungary: EU attacks on Orban are a sign of worse things to come
- Iraqi resistance conducts drone strike on US-run base in Syria
- Failing to Defeat Hezbollah, Israel & US Pressure Syria’s Ahmed al-Sharaa to Join War
- US-Israeli war on Iran drives global fertilizer prices up 40%
- Hezbollah’s Surprise Weapons Redefine Ground Battle with Israel
- Yemen joins fight against US, Israel by firing missiles at occupied territories
- Seizing the Kharg: Washington’s path to defeat in the Persian Gulf
- Iran reports 500 US casualties in strikes on covert US military sites
- If Americans Knew
- Over 300 US service members wounded, majority have brain injuries – Not a ceasefire Day 169
- Researchers at Human Rights Watch Resign Over Blocked Report on Palestinian Refugee Return
- Jewish Groups Are Backing a War Americans Don’t Want
- Eric Fingerhut Thinks He’s the President of the Jews
- Top Jewish Philanthropists, Rabbis Urge Israeli President to Take Action Against ‘Jewish Extremists’
- Don’t Be Fooled. Zionist Leaders Have Always Wanted to Control Southern Lebanon
- Israel’s widespread use of torture is a core element of its genocide against the Palestinian people
- In Israel’s War on Iran, Many Middle East US Bases Rendered “All But Uninhabitable”
- ‘Burn the lawn’: Israel pursues ‘Rafah model’ in southern Lebanon
- A genocide here, an amputation there
- No Tricks Zone
- Devastating Assessment Of Comirnaty Vaccine By Former Senior Pfizer Europe Toxicologist
- New Study: CO2 Is ‘Effectively Negligible’ As An Explanatory Climate Change Factor Since 2000
- Former Pfizer Toxicologist Dr. Helmut Sterz Tells Bundestag Hearing Pfizer Vaccine Should Have Never Been Approved
- Energy Expert: Germany’s Nuclear Phaseout Was A “500 Billion Euro Mistake”
- New Research: South Australia’s Mid-Holocene Sea Surface Temperatures Were 4°C Warmer Than Today
- Storing Green Energy To Last Germany 10 Days Would Require A 60-Million Tonne Battery
- New Studies: UK Sea Levels Were 4 Meters Higher Than Today During The Mid-Holocene
- Destructive Green New Deal: German Energy And Metal Group Warns Of Drastic Crisis
- New Study Documents A 20-Year Pause In Arctic Sea Ice Decline – Driven By Internal Variability
- Wake-up Call: Survey Shows Majority Of Germans Now Favor Postponing Climate Targets!
Aletho News 