Switzerland releases, deports pro-Palestine American journalist
Press TV – January 28, 2025
Swiss officials have freed and deported prominent Palestinian American journalist Ali Abunimah, whom they arrested in the city of Zurich and held in police custody for three days, raising concerns about freedom of speech in the European country.
Abunimah, executive director of the online Electronic Intifada publication covering the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, confirmed his release in a post published on the X social media platform on Monday.
He said Swiss authorities detained him because of his advocacy for Palestinian rights.
“My ‘crime’? Being a journalist who speaks up for Palestine and against Israel’s genocide and settler-colonial savagery and those who aid and abet it,” the Palestinian American journalist wrote.
He was arrested in Zurich on Saturday before he was set to deliver a speech in the city. UN human rights experts and activists condemned the arrest.
The Reuters news agency, citing the Swiss police, said on Sunday that an entry ban and other measures under the country’s immigration law were the reason for Abunimah’s arrest.
The 53-year-old journalist said that when he was questioned by police officers, they accused him of “offending against Swiss law,” without providing specific charges.
He said he was “cut off from communication with the outside world, in a cell 24 hours a day”, adding that he was unable to contact his family. He added that he was only given back his phone at the gate of the plane that flew him to Istanbul.
Abunimah noted that during the period when he was taken to prison like a “dangerous criminal”, Switzerland welcomed Israeli President Isaac Herzog to the World Economic Forum in Davos.
“This ordeal lasted three days but that taste of prison was more than enough to leave me in even greater awe of the Palestinian heroes who endure months and years in the prisons of the genocidal oppressor,” Abunimah said.
“More than ever, I know that the debt we owe them is one we can never repay and all of them must be free and they must remain our focus.”
UN experts denounced Abunimah’s detention as an assault on free speech.
The UN special rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression, Irene Khan, called the arrest “shocking news” and urged Switzerland to investigate and release him.
Francesca Albanese, the UN special rapporteur on human rights in the occupied Palestinian territories, also called for an investigation into the incident.
“The climate surrounding freedom of speech in Europe is becoming increasingly toxic, and we should all be concerned,” Albanese wrote in a social media post.
The detention of Abunimah took place against the backdrop of intensified restrictions on pro-Palestinian advocates in Europe, amidst the catastrophic war on Gaza.
In April, Germany canceled a conference intended for advocates of Palestinian rights and barred British physician Ghassan Abu Sittah, who had provided medical assistance in Gaza, from entering the country.
WEF 2025: Calls for Tighter Social Media Censorship to Combat Antisemitism
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | January 27, 2025
At the 2025 World Economic Forum (WEF) Annual Meeting, a session titled “Confronting Antisemitism Amid Polarization” featured prominent speakers who advocated for stronger measures to compel social media platforms to censor content they consider harmful. Jonathan Greenblatt, CEO and National Director of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL); Randi Weingarten, President of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT); and Jennifer Schenker, Founder and Editor-in-Chief of The Innovator, expressed concerns about the influence of platforms like TikTok, X (formerly Twitter), and Facebook on public discourse and the spread of antisemitism.
Jennifer Schenker set the tone for the discussion by claiming, “The flames of antisemitism are being fanned every second by TikTok and social media,” and lamenting that “the Jewish community has not been able to effectively combat that online.”
Jonathan Greenblatt labeled social media platforms “a super spreader of antisemitism and hate” and criticized their impact on younger audiences, stating, “Young people… get their news from TikTok, which is fairly terrifying, or from X or from Instagram.” He also called Meta “a gigantic problem,” highlighting the challenges posed by the platforms’ size, business models, and governance structures.
Greenblatt further criticized Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA), describing it as “a loophole… which exempts [social media companies] from liability.” He called for regulatory and reputational pressure to compel these companies to act, suggesting that social pressure could deter top engineers from working for platforms perceived as unethical: “If their engineers feel like going to these companies and participating in something, you know, an evil enterprise, if you will, they don’t wanna do that.”
Randi Weingarten shared examples of how the AFT has used its influence to pressure social media platforms. “We have used the economic power sometimes against a place like Facebook or others to say, actually, you have to stand with what is moral and what is legal,” she said, acknowledging the union’s role in leveraging pension funds and other economic tools to advocate for what they consider the fight against hate.
Weingarten also expressed concerns over the influence of social media on young people’s perceptions of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). Recounting interactions with high school students in Boston, she noted that “every question [they asked] because of what they see and what they’re on” focused on the actions of the IDF, implying that platforms like TikTok and X should be more active in censoring such content.
Greenblatt emphasized the need for a broader coalition to address antisemitism, stating, “The Jewish community needs to recognize we can’t do it alone. We need institutions like government… and individuals, non-Jews, to realize antisemitism isn’t just a Jewish problem, it’s everyone’s problem.”
Weingarten echoed this sentiment, advocating for grassroots efforts to build understanding and combat hate: “There has to be a way that good people of the world end up fighting against hate.”
The CIA Report: Why a Low Confidence Finding is the Height of Hypocrisy
By Jonathan Turley | January 27, 2025
Every modern president seems to promise transparency during their campaigns, but few ever seem to get around to it. Once in power, the value of being opaque becomes evident. We will have to wait to see if President Donald Trump will fulfill his pledges, but so far this is proving the cellophane administration. Putting aside his constant press gaggles and conferences, the Administration has ordered wholesale disclosures of long-withheld files from everything from the JFK investigation to, most recently, the CIA COVID origins report. That report is particularly stinging for both the Biden Administration and its media allies.
Newly-confirmed CIA Director John Ratcliffe released the report, which details how it views the lab theory as the most likely explanation for the virus. Expressing “low confidence,” the agency still favored that theory over the natural origins theory, which was treated as sacrosanct by the media and favored by figures like Anthony Fauci. (Other recent reports have contradicted the equally orthodox view on the closing of schools, showing no material benefit in terms of slowing the transmission of COVID).
Even a low-confidence finding shows the height of hypocrisy in Washington where politicians and pundits savaged any scientist who even suggested the possibility that the virus was man-made and likely originated in the Wuhan lab near the site of the outbreak.
This follows a recent disclosure in the Wall Street Journal of a report on how the Biden administration may have suppressed dissenting views supporting the lab theory on the origin of the COVID-19 virus. Not only were the FBI and its top experts excluded from a critical briefing of President Biden, but government scientists were reportedly warned that they were “off the reservation” in supporting the lab theory.
As previously discussed, many journalists used the rejection of the lab theory to paint Trump as a bigot. By the time Biden became president, not only were certain government officials heavily invested in the zoonotic or natural origin theory, but so were many in the media.
Reporters used opposition to the lab theory as another opportunity to pound their chests and signal their virtue.
MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace mocked Trump and others for spreading one of his favorite “conspiracy theories.” MSNBC’s Kasie Hunt insisted that “we know it’s been debunked that this virus was manmade or modified,”
MSNBC’s Joy Reid also called the lab leak theory “debunked bunkum,” while CNN reporter Drew Griffin criticized spreading the “widely debunked” theory. CNN host Fareed Zakaria told viewers that “the far right has now found its own virus conspiracy theory” in the lab leak.
NBC News’s Janis Mackey Frayer described it as the “heart of conspiracy theories.”
The Washington Post was particularly dogmatic. When Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark) raised the theory, he was chastised for “repeat[ing] a fringe theory suggesting that the ongoing spread of a coronavirus is connected to research in the disease-ravaged epicenter of Wuhan, China.”
Likewise, after Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) mentioned the lab theory, Post Fact Checker Glenn Kessler mocked him: “I fear @tedcruz missed the scientific animation in the video that shows how it is virtually impossible for this virus jump from the lab. Or the many interviews with actual scientists. We deal in facts, and viewers can judge for themselves.”
As these efforts failed and more information emerged supporting the lab theory, many media figures just looked at their shoes and shrugged. Others became more ardent. In 2021, New York Times science and health reporter Apoorva Mandavilli was still calling on reporters not to mention the “racist” lab theory.
In Kessler’s case, he wrote that the lab theory was “suddenly credible” as if it had sprung from the head of Zeus rather than having been supported for years by scientists, many of whom had been canceled and banned.
As these figures were attacking reports, Biden officials were sitting on these reports. Figures like Fauci did nothing to support those academics being canceled or censored for raising the theory.
The very figures claiming to battle “disinformation” were suppressing opposing views that have now been vindicated as credible. It was not only the lab theory. In my recent book, I discuss how signatories of the Great Barrington Declaration were fired or disciplined by their schools or associations for questioning COVID-19 policies.
The suppression of the lab theory proves the ultimate fallacy of censorship. Throughout history, censorship has never succeeded. It has never stopped a single idea or a movement. It has a perfect failure rate. Ideas, like water, have a way of finding their way out in time.
Yet, as the last few years have shown, it does succeed in imposing costs on those with dissenting views. For years, figures like Bhattacharya (who was recently awarded the prestigious Intellectual Freedom Award by the American Academy of Sciences and Letters) were hounded and marginalized.
Others opposed Bhattacharya’s right to offer his scientific views, even under oath. For example, in one hearing, Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.) expressed disgust that Bhattacharya was even allowed to testify as “a purveyor of COVID-19 misinformation.”
Los Angeles Times columnist Michael Hiltzik decried an event associated with Bhattacharya, writing that “we’re living in an upside-down world” because Stanford University allowed dissenting scientists to speak at a scientific forum. Hiltzik also wrote a column titled “The COVID lab leak claim isn’t just an attack on science, but a threat to public health.”
One of the saddest aspects of this story is that many of these figures in government, academia and the media were not necessarily trying to shield China. Some were motivated by their investment in the narrative while others were drawn by the political and personal benefits that came from joining the mob against a minority of scientists.
The CIA report does not resolve this debate, but it shows that there is a legitimate debate despite the overwhelming message of the media and the attacks on scientists. Of course, the same media and political figures responsible for this culture of intimidation have simply moved on. The value of an alliance with the media is that such embarrassing contradictions are not reported. At most, these figures shrug and turn to the next subject for groupthink and mob action.
Donald Trump Is Protecting Free Speech
By Norman Singleton | The Libertarian Institute | January 27, 2025
Donald Trump wasted no time implementing his agenda by issuing a series of executive orders just hours after being sworn in as the 47th president. The orders covered subjects ranging from immigration, to energy production, to a freeze on both new federal regulations and hiring federal employees. One order that has not gotten nearly as much attention as it deserves is the one Restoring Freedom of Speech and Ending Federal Censorship. This order states that it is federal policy to “ensure that no Federal Government officer, employee, or agent engages in or facilitates any conduct that would unconstitutionally abridge the free speech of any American citizen.” It also requires the government to “ensure that no taxpayer resources” are used to “violate the First Amendment rights of American citizens.”
In order to carry out these pro-free speech policies, the order states that “no federal department, agency, entity, officer, employee, or agent may act or use any Federal resources” to violate the First Amendment rights of any American citizen. It also directs the Attorney General to work with “the heads of other executive agencies and departments” to investigate “the activities of the Federal Government over the last 4 years that are inconsistent” with the First Amendment. The Attorney General must then prepare a report for President Trump and his Chief of Policy that contains recommendations for “remedial actions for any violations of the First Amendment taken by the prior Administration.”
The explicit prohibition on federal officials violating the First Amendment may seem redundant since federal employees already take an oath to uphold the Constitution; thus they swore not to violate American citizens’ constitutionally protected rights. However, Biden administration officials, including the big guy, routinely violated the free speech rights of American citizens. As federal Judge Terry A. Doughty wrote in a July 4, 2023 preliminary injunction forbidding government officials from having any contact with social media companies, “the present case arguably involves the most massive attack against free speech in United States history.”
Leaked emails between officials and employees of social media companies back up Judge Doughty’s statement. The communications went beyond mere suggestions, constitutng threats of retribution if the social media companies did not comply with the administration’s “requests” that they censor their customers. For example, then-Surgeon General Vivek Murthy suggested that the administration may have to take “appropriate legal and regulatory” measures to stop the spread of COVID “misinformation.” Facebook creator and CEO of Meta (parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and Whats App) Mark Zuckerberg, while appearing on the popular Joe Rogan Show described how Biden officials “would call up our team and, like, scream at them and curse.” Zuckerberg also told Joe Rogan that Biden administration officials brought up the possibility that the White House would support imposing new regulations on social media platforms, including modifying Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act.
This is the section of federal law that protects those who run online platforms like Facebook and Twitter/X from being held liable for the posts their users make. Section 230 has been instrumental in the growth of social media. Repealing or weakening Section 230 would hurt the big companies but the main victims would be small and start up companies who would find it more difficult to attract investors if there were the possibility the company could be held liable for posts by the site’s users. Government employees threatening private companies and treating them like subordinates should be unacceptable in a free society—and should be criminalized if done to coerce the companies to violate their customers’ constitutionally protected rights.
Fortunately, at least one cabinet member, Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, has pledged to cooperate in an investigation into the Biden administration’s assault on free speech. When government officials pressure private social media companies to take down or suspend posts they violate the First Amendment just as much as if they had directly blocked the posts. Therefore, all who value free speech should be grateful to President Trump for his executive order stopping government officials from violating the First Amendment and trying to discover the full truth about the Biden administration’s efforts to silence those using social media to post “unapproved” news and opinions. Hopefully, Congress will ensure no future administration can reverse President Trump’s executive order by passing legislation forbidding federal employees from “suggesting” that social media companies censor American citizens.
Swiss police arrest director of Electronic Intifada news outlet
Al Mayadeen | January 26, 2025
Swiss authorities have detained Ali Abunimah, a Palestinian-American journalist and co-founder of the pro-Palestine news outlet The Electronic Intifada (EI).
Abunimah was reportedly questioned by Swiss police for an hour upon his arrival at Zurich airport on Friday before being granted entry into the city.
Reports suggest he was arrested the following day, ahead of a scheduled speaking event.
“Abunimah’s arrest appears to be part of a growing backlash from Western governments against expressions of solidarity with the Palestinian people,” the Electronic Intifada said.
The Chicago-based independent publication voiced its solidarity with Abunimah, stating, “Speaking out against injustice in Palestine is not a crime. Journalism is not a crime.”
In posts on his X account, the journalist condemned the Israeli genocidal assault on the Gaza Strip and expressed support for the Palestinian resistance against the occupation.
His latest article, published on The Electronic Intifada on January 18, was titled “How Gaza’s Resistance Defeated Israel.”
The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) emphasized that Abunimah has been a consistent advocate against “Israel’s” injustices in Palestine, highlighting that his arrest appears to be a direct result of his outspoken activism.
“Abunimah’s arrest is a stark reminder of the increasing attempts to stifle voices calling for justice and accountability,” it pointed out.
Belgian-Lebanese activist Dyab Abou Jahjah, founder of the Hind Rajab Foundation, described Abunimah as a “political prisoner” and demanded his immediate release.
Last year, British police raided the home of Asa Winstanley, an associate editor with EI, and seized his computers and phones.
Christian church to change name in bid to fight off EU state’s crackdown
RT | January 26, 2025
The Estonian Orthodox Church (EOC) will change its name in response to the pressure from the authorities to sever its historical ties with Russia.
The announcement comes after the Estonian government approved draft legislation requiring religious organizations to cut ties with foreign leaders and entities whose actions could be deemed a threat to national security. “There should be no connection to entities that support military aggression,” Interior Minister Lauri Laanemets said on Thursday.
The EOC is a self-governing church that has maintained canonical ties to the Russian Orthodox Church. In a statement on Friday, EOC said that it will change its name to the Estonian Christian Orthodox Church.
“The government-approved bill violates the freedom of religion and is directed against our church,” Bishop Daniel of Tartu said, adding that, if made into law, the legislation could “significantly restrict the activities of our church.”
He argued that the new name would “further highlight the church’s local identity and demonstrate that we are acting in accordance with the law and, at the same time, we are respecting the church canons.”
Most Estonians are not religious. Around 16% of the population are Orthodox Christians, and 8% are Lutherans, according to the government statistics. Estonia was part of the Soviet Union from 1940 to 1991. Around 27% of the country’s population are Russian-speakers.
Earlier this week, Laanemets branded EOC “the most important instrument of influence for Russia and the Kremlin in Estonia.”
Last year, the minister threatened to shut down monasteries that refuse to cut ties with the Moscow Patriarchate and even threatened to classify the Russian Orthodox Church as a terrorist organization.
Moscow Patriarchate spokesman Vladimir Legoyda has slammed Laanemets’ comments as a “witch hunt,” suggesting that the Estonian government was using the crackdown on the church to distract the taxpayers from “real issues.”
In August 2024, the EOC revised its charter and removed the mention of the Moscow Patriarchate from its official name, although Laanemets has insisted that the measure was insufficient.
EU officials have criticized the Russian Orthodox Church for its support of the Russian troops in Ukraine. In 2022, the UK imposed sanctions on the church’s head, Patriarch Kirill of Moscow.
Zionist group sending Trump list of pro-Palestine students for deportation: Report
Press TV – January 25, 2025
An American-Zionist group is reportedly compiling the names of foreign students on visas to hand to the new administration of US President Donald Trump for deportation over holding pro-Palestine demonstrations across university campuses.
The World Betar Movement has initiated a campaign to identify the foreign students in the United States who have participated in anti-Israel activities on college campuses, The New York Post said.
The group is preparing a list of names to provide to the Trump administration, aiming to facilitate the deportation of individuals who condemn Israeli genocide and support Palestinian resistance movements in the Gaza Strip.
The group has about 30 names of students from countries such as Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Canada, and the United Kingdom currently enrolled in some of the top US universities, including Columbia, UPenn, Michigan, Syracuse, UCLA, The New School for Social Research, Carnegie Mellon, and George Washington University, it said.
Accusing the pro-Palestine students of anti-Semitism, Ross Glick, director of the US chapter of Betar, said, “We have started lists of Jew-hating foreign nationals on visas who support Hamas.”
Stressing that Betar is utilizing facial recognition software and advanced database technology to compile the list, Glick said the initiative aligns with Trump’s campaign promise to revoke the student visas of individuals engaging in anti-Semitic activities.
The World Betar Movement is reportedly in contact with Trump administration officials to pursue legal action against foreign students and prevent what they view as the exploitation of the American academic system for anti-Israel purposes.
Trump on Friday issued an executive order allowing the deportation of those non-citizens, including foreign students, who have been supporting US-designated “terrorist” organizations of the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas and its Lebanese counterpart, Hezbollah, on American soil.
Pro-Palestine students at American and European universities have held widespread rallies and sit-ins across their campuses in support of Gaza since Hamas-led resistance groups launched Operation Al-Aqsa Flood into the Israeli-occupied territories on October 7, 2023, in response to the regime’s decades-long crimes against Palestinians.
Israel has killed at least 47,000 Palestinians, mostly women and children, and injured 111,000 other individuals in Gaza since the onset of its genocidal war against Gaza, also leaving thousands more missing and presumed dead under the rubble.
Israel was forced to agree to a ceasefire, which began on January 19, after it failed to achieve its declared objectives in the besieged territory.
Palestinians celebrated the ceasefire as a victory with some 2,000 Palestinian prisoners set to be released from Israeli prisons in exchange for Israeli captives held in Gaza.
Harvard blocks Gaza patient session as university adopts controversial anti-Semitism definition
MEMO | January 24, 2025
Harvard Medical School has cancelled a planned lecture and panel discussion featuring patients from Gaza, following complaints that the session would present only one side of the conflict, amid growing concerns about academic freedom after the university’s adoption of a highly controversial definition of anti-Semitism which conflates criticism of Israel and the political ideology of Zionism with anti-Jewish racism.
According to the Harvard Crimson, the medical school’s Dean, George Q Daley, cancelled the 21 January events just hours before they were scheduled, citing objections that students would hear from Gazans receiving care in Boston without also hearing from Israeli perspectives. The session was to include a lecture on wartime healthcare by Tufts Professor Barry S. Levy, followed by discussions with Gaza patients and their families.
HMS and HSDM Student Council President Anna RP Mulhern said she was “deeply disheartened” by the cancellation. “Respect for all patients and their stories is a fundamental tenet of the medical profession. This principle was not upheld yesterday,” she stated.
The cancellation came shortly after Harvard agreed to adopt the highly controversial International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of anti-Semitism as part of settling a discrimination lawsuit brought by Jewish students who claimed harassment during pro-Palestine protests. IHRA is favoured by Israel and advocates of the apartheid state as it grants special privileges to the political ideology of Zionism and apartheid state. No other political ideology or state is granted protection from criticism in the same way.
HMS Professor David S Jones, who helped develop the course curriculum, reported receiving 50 emails from students questioning the cancellation. He noted that Arabic-speaking medical students who had served as interpreters for Gazan patients in Boston had requested the session.
Critics argue the decision reflects a broader assault on academic freedom and free speech rights. Journalist Glenn Greenwald, discussing Harvard’s adoption of the IHRA definition, warned it represents “an outright systemic assault on the Free Speech rights of American citizens on the academic freedom that is supposed to prevail in our institutions of higher learning.”
Greenwald highlighted how the IHRA definition prohibits various forms of criticism of Israel that would be perfectly acceptable if directed at other nations. He noted that under these new rules, Harvard students remain free to describe any country, including the US, as fundamentally racist – except Israel. “You can say that the United States and its existence is a racist endeavour, that you’re allowed to say… nobody tries to censor that,” Greenwald explained.
Pick any country in the entire world at Harvard and you are totally free to call the existence of that country a racist endeavour except one country where you fall into the crime of hate speech and that is the state of Israel.
The combination of event cancellations and adoption of the IHRA definition has raised concerns about the chilling effect on academic discourse. Critics argue that medical education, which relies on hearing directly from patients about their experiences, could be particularly impacted if geopolitical considerations begin to override educational ones.
“This is nothing more than an outright systemic assault on the Free Speech rights of American citizens on the academic freedom that is supposed to prevail in our institutions of Higher Learning,” Greenwald concluded, arguing that such restrictions serve “not to protect our own country, our own culture, our own government, the security of our own people but to protect this foreign country.”
Australia Plans to Expand “Hate Speech” Laws Amid Debate Over Free Speech Protections
By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | January 22, 2025
Australian officials are doubling down on the policy of “strengthening” what they call hate speech laws both at the federal, and state levels – and some are even presenting the country’s weak free speech protections as an advantage.
New South Wales (NSW) Premier Chris Minns has promised that even more restrictive legislation to tackle whatever the state’s authorities decide is hate speech is coming soon. It seems that “strengthening” these laws will come down to criminalizing even more types of speech, by including vague categories like “vilification.”
Minns is justifying this policy by claiming that hate speech is behind later actual criminal activities, and he’s putting the emphasis on the goings-on in the “community” especially where it pertains to religious and racial strife, i.e, protecting “multiculturalism” and “cultural diversity” by means of repressing speech.
As for when New South Wales residents can look forward to the introduction of these legislative proposals, Minns revealed that it will “hopefully” happen when parliament returns (scheduled to happen in early February).
The broadening of these laws’ scope is particularly interesting in terms of the idea of adding (racial or religious) “vilification,” currently a civil offense.
And Minns chose an odd way to defend Australia’s lack of strong free speech protections – like those enjoyed by Americans. He said there was “a very good reason for that” – namely, that Australia is a country of immigrants coming from all over the world. So – just like the United States?
But Minns seems to suggest that “basic tenets of life” can only be protected if free speech is not.
Australian Housing Minister Clare O’Neil commented on these New South Wales plans to say that the federal government was “looking at anything” it could do to deal with antisemitism, which she described as a “growing problem.”
And while hate speech laws were already “strengthened” at the federal level last year, O’Neil said – by banning “hate symbols and antisemitic phrases and symbols” – the minister believes there is “more work to be done.
“We’ve got to do more. We’ve got the Australian Federal Police working with state police, we’ve got state governments really stepping up on this, and I think we’ve all got a really clear interest here,” O’Neil told journalists.
The Gaza Genocide: A New Low in Democracy and Human History
Germany’s Undemocratic Assaults
By Ricardo Martins – New Eastern Outlook – January 22, 2025
The genocide unfolding in Gaza continues to expose the inadequacies of the international judiciary, organizations, and, more importantly, the complicity of part of the global community of nations in enabling such atrocities.
Germany Taken to the ICJ for Complicity in Genocide
In March 2024, Nicaragua brought a case against Germany at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), accusing it of aiding and supporting genocide in Gaza by supplying arms to Israel, fully aware of the genocidal risks involved. Shockingly, the ICJ failed to condemn Germany.
Germany also maintains unwavering and unconditional political and diplomatic support for Israel. German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock displayed a cheerleader-like demeanor during her initial visit to support Israel after October 7—a stance echoed by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.
According to the Middle East Eye, Germany’s support for Israel’s actions highlights a hypocritical approach to international law and human rights. The analysis goes further: “No one can reasonably believe in the fairytale of Germany’s moral responsibility anymore, as the country defends, finances, arms, and diplomatically supports the genocide of Palestinians, in addition to the bombing of Lebanon, Yemen, and Syria, while shielding those responsible from accountability.”
Protests Against Israel Are Considered “Antisemitic” in Germany
With the Bundestag’s adoption last November of the resolution “Never again is now: Protecting, preserving, and strengthening Jewish life in Germany”, the country has entered a proto-fascistic state—without any condemnation from the European Union. Policymakers crafting this resolution refused input from diverse human rights groups and instead relied solely on the controversial International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism.
Even before this resolution, but now bolstered by it, Germany has witnessed a gradual erosion of democracy under its ‘proud guilty’ ideology. This includes prior censorship of cultural events partially or fully funded by public money, the cancellation of events featuring critics of Israel’s government, and even conferences discussing the Palestinian question. Concurrently, there has been a sharp rise in the smearing of critics with allegations of antisemitism. Make no mistake—censorship is alive and well in Germany. Protests critical of Israel’s actions in Gaza are being unjustly and undemocratically labelled as antisemitic.
Further, children can be banned from schools for wearing “pro-Palestinian symbols such as the keffiyeh,” as is written in a letter sent to school principals by Berlin’s education senator, Katharina Günther-Wünsch.
Furthermore, this resolution introduced a mandatory declaration for asylum seekers, requiring them to affirm the existence of the state of Israel and pledge not to participate in or support boycott campaigns against it.
Over the past month, German politicians have called for changing laws, including those around the right to demonstrate and freedom of opinion. The idea of withdrawing citizenship, residency, welfare benefits or funding from anyone accused of making anti-Semitic statements has been floated as well as a plan to only allow “native Germans” to protest.
Prior to this resolution, we have already witnessed undemocratic and even fascistic actions in Germany. These include the arrest of citizens for trivial reasons, such as holding a placard stating “I am not complicit in genocide,” and the arrest of a child for holding a Palestinian flag. Former Greek finance minister Yanis Varoufakis was prohibited from addressing a Jew-Palestinian conference and from permanently speaking to the German public online. A meeting organised by the progressive collective DiEM25, alongside Palestinian and Jewish Voice for Peace groups, on April 12th, 2024, was disrupted, dismantled, and labelled an “Islamist” event by the Interior Ministry.
Furthermore, the renowned British-Palestinian surgeon Dr Ghassan Abu-Sitta, who volunteered in Gaza hospitals during the genocide, was banned from entering Germany. Dr Abu-Sitta was due to provide a firsthand account of the atrocities taking place on the ground. Due to Germany’s Schengen-wide interdiction, he was also barred from entering France to speak at a French Senate meeting, despite being invited by the Senate itself.
These actions raise pressing and undeniable questions about a democratic deficit and institutional racism within German governmental structures.
A Threat to Germany’s Academic Freedom and Reputation?
Protests critical of Israel’s actions in Gaza have been wrongfully labelled antisemitic. The German Education Ministry sought to explore whether academic funding could be cut for those critical of clearing the pro-Palestinian camp at Freie Universität Berlin (Free University Berlin). This crackdown led to police detaining over 70 individuals temporarily and initiating 80 criminal investigations, alongside 79 misdemeanour proceedings.
Ironically, the Education Minister, Bettina Stark-Watzinger of the Free Democratic Party (FDP), previously declared that freedom is the foundation “for the way we live in our country, for our democracy, our constitutional state, and our prosperity.” She made this statement during the launch of Germany’s Science Year 2024.
In stark contrast, over 2,900 academics have accused Stark-Watzinger of threatening freedom of expression, calling for her resignation in an open letter. The letter, signed by thousands of German and international academics, accuses the education minister of intimidation, stating: “Repressive reviews of academics who publicly express critical views of governmental decisions are characteristic of authoritarian regimes that systematically suppress free discussion, including within universities.”
Why is Germany Having This Behaviour?
Driven by its ideology of ‘proud guilt,’ which elevates support for Israel to a raison d’état, Germany appears to have abandoned all sense of proportionality and reason—where even a child wearing a keffiyeh in a school is deemed a threat to Israel’s existence and, by extension, to German security.
In many respects, it now exhibits the characteristics of a quasi-fascist state. My few examples above, out of thousands, support this claim. To make things worse, the German government refuses to comply with the ICC prosecutor’s request to arrest Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Yoav Gallant.
According to Körber Fondation’s latest survey, which polls German citizens on foreign policy, only 19% of Germans support their country’s military aid to Israel. This shows a blatant divide between Germany’s political/media elites and the people they are supposed to represent.
German citizens deserve to know why their freedoms are being restricted and whose interests are being served. Why do Israel’s interests take precedence over those of German citizens and Germany’s international reputation? Why must the Palestinian people continue to pay the price for Germany’s past mistakes? I will delve into this matter further in my next article.
To conclude, the most astonishing aspect of these atrocities against German freedoms and the Palestinian people is the deafening silence of the European Union and the European Human Rights Court. The double standards of the European institutions are blatant and hypocritical.
Ricardo Martins ‒ PhD in Sociology, specializing in policies, European and world politics and geopolitics
Google Exits EU’s Voluntary Anti-“Disinformation” Code, Defying Digital Services Act Requirements
By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | January 21, 2025
It’s as good a time as any to effectively pull out of the EU’s “voluntary anti-disinformation” deal, which social media companies were previously strong-armed into accepting. And Google has now done just that.
The “strengthened” Code of Practice on Disinformation was introduced during the heyday of online censorship and government pressure on social platforms on both sides of the Atlantic – in June 2022, and at one point included 44 signatories.
One of those who in the meanwhile dropped out is X, and this happened shortly after Twitter was acquired by Elon Musk.
Now, as the “voluntary” code is formally becoming part of EU’s censorship law, the Digital Services Act (DSA), Google took the opportunity to notify Brussels it will not comply with the law’s requirement to include fact-checkers’ opinions in the search results, or rely on those to delete or algorithmically rank YouTube content.
Accepting these DSA requirements “simply isn’t appropriate or effective for our services,” Google’s Global Affairs President Kent Walker stated in a letter sent to European Commission’s Deputy Director-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology, Renate Nikolay, reports said.
At the same time, Google is withdrawing from “all fact-checking commitments in the Code” – this refers to the signatories working with “fact-checkers” across EU member-countries. The code also requires tech companies to flag content, label political ads, demonetizing users found to be “spreading disinformation,” etc.
Even though Google’s censorship apparatus does not use third-party “fact-checkers” as it is, the news that the company has decided to defy the EU on this issue is interpreted as yet more proof that social media giants are breaking free from some of the constraints imposed on them by the authorities over the past years.
Meta recently announced that its fact-checking scheme in the US was ending in order to make room for more free speech on Facebook and Instagram, but it remains a signatory of the Code in the EU.
It remains to be seen what decision Meta will make once that agreement becomes part of the DSA – the deadline for which is currently unknown.
Featured Video
The Sordid History of the CIA – Part 2
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
Book Review
Jeffrey Epstein: A Jewish Individual?
The Occidental Observer | February 5, 2023
One Nation Under Blackmail: The Sordid Union between Intelligence and Organized Crime that Gave Rise to Jeffrey Epstein (Volume 1 & 2) by Whitney Webb
“Far from being an anomaly, Epstein was one of several men who, over the past century, have engaged in sexual blackmail activities designed to obtain damaging information (i.e., “intelligence”) on powerful individuals with the goal of controlling their activities and securing their compliance.”[1]
Jeffrey Epstein is dead and Ghislaine Maxwell is locked away in prison, and the thought-makers of our world seem keen to let the more explosive parts of the scandal dissipate from the public consciousness. As far as the mainstream media is concerned, Epstein and Maxwell were little more than well-connected socialites who ran a sex-trafficking ring for the rich and the powerful, and the focus has shifted instead to the criminal and civil cases seeking to achieve redress for the victims of sexual abuse.
On occasion some newspaper articles will mention the hidden cameras littered across Epstein’s properties, others the reams of CDs and hard drives found within them during the FBI raids. Altogether missing from the Netflix documentaries (Jeffrey Epstein: Filthy Rich [2020] and Ghislaine Maxwell: Filthy Rich [2022]) or the articles that spend their time narrowly focusing on the links between Epstein and Bill Gates, is the acknowledgement of the true nature of Epstein himself and the ultimate purpose of this sex-trafficking of minors — a sexual blackmail operation.
Not everyone is cowardly enough to let these controversial aspects lie untouched, as the newly released two-volume book One Nation Under Blackmail by independent reporter Whitney Webb seeks to blow wide open this media-enforced blackout. Utilizing primarily open-source information (that is, publicly accessible information such as books, newspapers articles and government reports),[2] Webb’s book delves into the life and times of Jeffrey Epstein and his deep ties to Jewish billionaires and Israeli intelligence. … continue
Blog Roll
Recent Comments
Aletho News- Trump’s ‘Board of Peace’ exports Israeli ‘ceasefire’ diplomacy to the world
- Israeli army closes dozens of cases involving killing of Palestinians inside torture camps
- Europe creates a ‘Russian government-in-exile’, consisting of a bunch of losers
- Munich, 2007: The Day the West Was Told No
- At The Munich Security Conference, AOC Gets It Wrong On Foreign Policy
- Europe Decided to Go to War With Russia by 2030, Already Preparing – Orban
- Russia and China Are Expanding Their Cooperation to Counter US Efforts to Bully Iran and Cuba
- NATO plotting maritime blockade of Russia – Moscow
- Jeffrey Epstein’s sinister shadow over West Asia
- The Sordid History of the CIA – Part 2
- If Americans Knew
- Israel battles Palestinian right of return, one Palestinian at a time – Not a ceasefire Day 127
- Noor’s short life of unimaginable suffering
- Israel Destroyed Gaza’s Hospitals. Now It’s Banning Doctors Without Borders.
- Is Spite of What Zionists Say, It’s a Good Thing to Criticize Governments
- Palestinian mother, daughter recount strip searches, harsh conditions in Israeli detention
- Israel used weapons in Gaza that made thousands of Palestinians evaporate
- ADL’s Stats Twist Israel’s Critics Into Antisemites
- Why Is the World Silent When the Gaza Genocide Is Not Over?
- In Gaza: 8,000 bodies under rubble, 3,000 missing – Not a ceasefire Day 126
- AZAPAC, the new PAC opposing Israeli domination of U.S policies
- No Tricks Zone
- Unfudging The Data: Dutch Meteorological Institute Reinstates Early 20th Centruy Heat Waves It Had Erased Earlier
- German Gas Crisis…Chancellor Merz Allegedly Bans Gas Debate Ahead of Elections!
- Pollen Reconstructions Show The Last Glacial’s Warming Events Were Global, 10x Greater Than Modern
- Germany’s Natural Gas Storage Level Dwindles To Just 28%… Increasingly Critical
- New Study Rebuts The Assumption That Anthropogenic CO2 Molecules Have ‘Special’ Properties
- Climate Scientist Who Predicted End Of “Heavy Frost And Snow” Now Refuses Media Inquiries
- Polar Bear Numbers Rising And Health Improving In Areas With The Most Rapid Sea Ice Decline
- One Reason Only For Germany’s Heating Gas Crisis: Its Hardcore-Dumbass Energy Policy
- 130 Years Later: The CO2 Greenhouse Effect Is Still Only An Imaginary-World Thought Experiment
- New Study Affirms Rising CO2’s Greening Impact Across India – A Region With No Net Warming In 75 Years
Aletho News 