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.
Failed State America. Joe Biden’s absolute destruction of freedom of speech
By Martin Jay | Strategic Culture Foundation | January 20, 2025
Sometimes the internet seems to be overbrimming with video clips showing hilarious examples of what a failed state actually looks like. One of the most common is MPs, or ‘deputies’ actually fighting in their own parliaments against one another. The irony of these clips is that they are usually uploaded by westerners who use to them as a tool to boost or gentrify the reality of western countries’ democratic models.
But no more.
Thanks to Joe Biden’s genocidal maniacs club, the last days of his rule gave us a gem in the form of a press conference where the limit of just how America is anything but a functioning democracy was stretched to breaking point in what appeared to both be deeply sad yet comical at the same time.
As the odious Anthony Blinken gave his patronizing speech to the so-called journalists amassed before him which felt a little like an aristocrat who had gathered the servants in the library to congratulate them on finding an item of lost jewelry of her ladyship’s, we witnessed in real time what America and what these State Department’s press briefings really are: a fraud.
Blinken thanked those present for asking difficult questions, when in fact, none had really been asked in 4 years. Why? Because that is not part of the unwritten rules of how these press briefings work. But the moment he had mentioned the “difficult questions” he was, perhaps appropriately, delivered a series of difficult questions by the Jewish American journalist Max Blumenthal. What was not so surprising was how none of those questions were answered as Blinken, being a smart operator, knew if he kept composed and didn’t rise to the bait it would probably anger Blumenthal even more allowing the tirade to look on camera at least like a rant which had got out of control. Seconds passed and Blumenthal was ushered away by officials which he didn’t offer any resistance to. Moments passed before the veteran Arab journalist Sam Husseini also asked more difficult questions to an increasingly startled Blinken before we see the extent of how far America has abandoned its own free speech doctrine which it used to espouse to the rest of the world: Husseini was actually physically removed by overweight, armed police officers who you can see quite clearly feel uncomfortable about what they are doing, which most people would associate with a tin pot West African country’s ruling junta and not the American government at a press conference.
But the really shocking part of this story was yet to come: the absolute refusal by colleagues in the press room to even verbally object will have stunned journalists all over the world. It provokes many questions about journalism and what these individuals in the room think they are actually doing. We were given though a clue to quite how far journalism has died in the West and been replaced by a cheaper, easy wipe brand called ‘pseudo journalism’ – where actors take one function of journalists but who effectively work for the ruling elite rather than previously for the masses who used to fund the model by buying the actual publications. CNN reporting of the fiasco was very telling. They lost no time putting the boot into Blumenthal, who, naturally they must despise as he functions as a real journalist and they have long forgotten what this entails years ago, opting for the new model of fake news operator. They referred to Blumenthal as an “activist” – a typical slur from big media to individual journalists who carry out stellar work.
The truth about this incident is that such press conferences at the state department or indeed in the European Commission in Brussels are entirely staged. They are a theatre concocted by the elite and the press themselves as part of a dirty deal whereby the journalists ask the softball questions which allow the top figures to deliver the prepared spiel. The so-called journalists sign up to this and in return get access to individuals and scoops – although it’s important to note that the scoops are nearly always new items which serve the state’s purpose. It’s a game which has been going on for a long time and the humble masses don’t understand how they are being taken for a ride by the magicians’ allusion of something which might look credible. In these press gatherings some journalists are even asked to present certain questions which are even suggested by those holding the conference, something I witnessed myself a lot in Brussels.
It was not that the questions put to Blinken were so harsh, or even unconventional. The point is that both Blumenthal and Husseini broke the house rules when they went rogue and did what most people would view to be the role of real journalists: ask unscripted questions. Look what happens when journalist do this. We are treated to a debacle which we would expect to see in the global south, or certainly in Nazi Germany in the 30s. And this is America?
The cat is out of the bag. The whole world can see now how America has lost all its links with the democratic model and become and autocracy, run, financed and ruled by Israel’s cash. Netanyahu and his cronies must have had a really good laugh watching those journalists being removed like that. Presumably their press accreditations will be removed and certainly the worry that both of them will have is that they now mysteriously find themselves being investigated for tax irregularities, theft, fraud or even having child porn on their computers. Journalists like Blumenthal are the biggest threat to the deep state as they will never be part of the establishment and therefore will always be the most dangerous guy to tackle. The one who has nothing to lose is your biggest threat. I don’t imagine Trump and his cabal will be any kinder to him despite The Grayzone taking a more grown-up approach to Russia and how the Ukraine war is reported, as opposed to CNN’s stenographic reproduction of the State Department’s narrative, seasoned by fake news on occasion.
The real enemy for western elites is the feral truth. All pretense of a functioning democracy were eradicated in a matter of minutes with this press conference calamity which has now replaced those MPs in that central European country throwing chairs at one another in their own parliament. Great job, Joe.
The Competency Crisis Proliferating The West
By Alastair Crooke | Strategic Culture Foundation | January 20, 2025
The essayist and military strategist, Aurelien, has written a paper entitled: The Strange Defeat (original in French). The ‘strange defeat’ being that of Europe’s ‘curious’ inability to understand Ukraine or its military mechanics.
Aurelien highlights the strange lack of realism by which the West has approached the crisis —
“ … and the almost pathological dissociation from the real world that it displays in its words and actions. Yet, even as the situation deteriorates, and the Russian forces advance everywhere, there is no sign that the West is becoming more reality-based in its understanding – and it is very likely that it will continue to live in its alternative construction of reality until it is forcibly expelled”.
The writer continues in some detail (omitted here) to explain why NATO has no strategy for Ukraine and no real operational plan:
“It has only a series of ad hoc initiatives, linked together by vague aspirations that have no connection with real life plus the hope that ‘something [beneficial] will occur’. Our current Western political leaders have never had to develop such skills. Yet it is actually worse than that: not having developed these skills, not having advisers who have developed them, they cannot really understand what the Russians are doing, how and why they are doing it. Western leaders are like spectators who do not know the rules of chess or Go – and are trying to figure out who is winning”.
“What exactly was their goal? Now, responses such as ‘to send a message to Putin’, ‘complicate Russian logistics’, or ‘improve morale at home’ are no longer allowed. What I want to know is what is expected in concrete terms? What are the tangible results of their ‘messaging’? Can they guarantee that it will be understood? Have you anticipated the possible reactions of the Russians – and what will you do then?”
The essential problem, Aurelien bluntly concludes, is that:
“our political classes and their parasites have no idea how to deal with such crises, or even how to understand them. The war in Ukraine involves forces that are orders of magnitude larger than any Western nation has deployed on operations since 1945 … Instead of real strategic objectives, they have only slogans and fanciful proposals”.
Coldly put, the author explains that for complex reasons connected with the nature of western modernity, the liberal élites simply are not competent or professional in matters of security. And they do not understand its nature.
U.S. cultural critic Walter Kirn makes rather similar claims in a very different, yet related, context: California Fires and America’s Competency Crisis –
“Los Angeles is in flames, yet California’s leaders seem helpless, unmasking a generation of public investment in non-essential services [that leaves the Authorities floundering amidst the predicted occurrence of the fires]”.
On a Joe Rogan podcast earlier this month, a firefighter goes: “It’s just going to be the right wind and fire’s going to start in the right place and it’s going to burn through LA all the way to the ocean, and there’s not a f***ing thing we can do about it”.
Kirn observes:
“This isn’t the first fire or set of fires in Malibu. Just a few years ago, there were big fires. There always are. They’re inevitable. But having built this giant city in this place with this vulnerability, there are measures that can be taken to contain and to fend off the worst”.
“To fob it off on climate change, as I say, is a wonderful thing to tell yourself, but none of this started yesterday. My only point is this, has it done everything it can to prepare for an inevitable, unavoidable situation that perhaps in scale differs from the past, but certainly not in kind? Are its leaders up to the job? There’s not a lot of sign that they are. They haven’t been able to deal with things like homelessness without fires. So the question of whether all those things have been done, whether they’ve been done well, whether there was adequate water in fire hydrants, whether they were working at all, things like that, and whether the fire department was properly trained or properly staffed, all those questions are going to arise”.
“And as far as the competency crisis goes, I think that there will be ample material to portray this as aggravated by incompetence. California’s a state that’s become notorious for spending a lot of money on things that don’t work, on high-speed rail lines that never are constructed, on all sorts of construction projects and infrastructure projects that never come to pass. And in that context, I think this will be devastating to the power structure of California”.
“In a larger sense though, it’s going to remind people that a politics that has been for years now about language and philosophical constructs such as equity and so on, is going to be seen as having failed in the most essential way, to protect people. And that these people are powerful and influential and privileged is going to make that happen faster and in a more prominent fashion”.
To which his colleague, journalist Matt Taibbi, responds:
“But pulling back in a broader sense, we do have a crisis of competency in this country. It has had a huge impact on American politics”. Kirn: “[Americans] They’re going to want less concern for the philosophical and/or even long-term political questions of equity and so on, I predict, and they’re going to want to lay in a minimum expectation of competence in natural disasters. In other words, this is a time when the priorities shift and I think that big change is coming, big, big change, because we look like we’ve been dealing with luxury problems, and we’ve certainly been dealing with other countries’ problems, Ukraine or whoever it might be, with massive funding. There are people in North Carolina right now still recovering from a flood and having a very difficult time as winter comes, which it doesn’t in LA in the same way, or as winter consolidates itself, I guess”;
“So looking forward, it’s not a question of blame, it’s what are people going to want? What are people going to value? What are they going to prize? Are their priorities going to shift? I think they will shift big time. Los Angeles will be a touchstone and it will be a touchstone for a new approach to government”.
So we have this ‘divorce from reality’ and consequent ‘Competency Crisis’ – whether in California; Ukraine or Europe. Where lie the roots to this malaise? U.S. writer David Samuels believes this to be the answer:
“In his last days in office … President Barack Obama made the decision to set the country on a new course. On Dec. 23, 2016, he signed into law the Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act, which used the language of defending the homeland to launch an open-ended, offensive information war, a war that fused the security infrastructure with the social media platforms – where the war supposedly was being fought”.
However, collapse of the 20th-century media pyramid and its rapid replacement by monopoly social media platforms, had made it possible for the Obama White House to sell policy – and reconfigure social attitudes and prejudices – in entirely new ways.
During the Trump years, Obama used these tools of the digital age to craft an entirely new type of power centre for himself – one that revolved around his unique position as the titular, though pointedly never-named, head of a Democratic Party which he succeeded in refashioning in his own image, Samuels writes.
The ‘permission structure’ machine that Barack Obama and David Axelrod (a highly successful Chicago political consultant), built to replace the Democratic Party was in its essence a device for getting people to act against their beliefs by substituting new and ‘better’ beliefs through the top-down controlled and leveraged application of social pressure – effectively turning Axelrod’s construct into ‘an omnipotent thought-machine’, Samuels suggests:
“The term ‘echo chambers’ describes the process by which the White House and its wider penumbra of think tanks and NGOs deliberately created an entirely new class of experts who mutually credentialed each other on social media in order to advance assertions that would formerly have been seen as marginal or not credible”.
The aim was for a platoon of aides, armed with laptops or smart phones, to ‘run’ with the latest inspired Party meme and to immediately repeat, and repeat it, across platforms, giving the appearance of an overwhelming tide of consensus filling the country. And thus giving people the ‘permission structure’ of apparent wide public assent to believe propositions that formerly they would never have supported.
“Where this analysis went wrong is the same place that the Obama team’s analysis of Trump went wrong: The wizards of the permission structure machine had become captives of the machinery that they built. The result was a fast-moving mirror world that could generate the velocity required to change the appearance of “what people believe” overnight. The newly minted digital variant of “public opinion” was rooted in the algorithms that determine how fads spread on social media, in which mass multiplied by speed equals momentum—speed being the key variable”.
“At every turn over the next four years, it was like a fever was spreading, and no one was immune. Spouses, children, colleagues, and supervisors at work began reciting, with the force of true believers, slogans they had only learned last week. It was the entirety of this apparatus, not just the ability to fashion clever or impactful tweets, that constituted the party’s new form of power”.
“In the end, however, the fever broke”. The credibility of Élites imploded.
Samuels account amounts to a stark warning of the danger associated with distance opening up between an underlying reality and an invented reality that could be successfully messaged, and managed, from the White House. “This possibility opened the door to a new potential for a large-scale disaster – like the war in Iraq”, Samuels suggests. (Samuels does not specifically mention Ukraine, although this is implied throughout the argument).
This – both the Obama tale, as told by David Samuels, and Walter Kirn’s story of California – augment Aurelien’s point about Ukraine and European military incompetence and lack of professionalism on the field: It is one of allowing a schism to open up between contrived narrative and reality – “which”, Samuels warns “is to say that, with enough money, operatives could create and operationalize mutually reinforcing networks of activists and experts to validate a messaging arc that would short-circuit traditional methods of validation and analysis, and lead unwary actors and audience members alike to believe that things that they had never believed; or even heard of before: Were in fact not only plausible, but already widely accepted within their specific peer groups”.
It constitutes the path to disaster – even risking nuclear disaster in the case of the Ukraine conflict. Will the ‘Competency Crisis’ reaching across such varied terrain trigger a re-think as Walter Kirn – a writer on cultural change – insists?
UK police summon Jeremy Corbyn after pro-Palestine rally

MEMO | January 20, 2025
The Metropolitan Police have summoned former UK Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn and ex-shadow chancellor John McDonnell for an “interview” following a pro-Palestinian rally in central London on Saturday, Anadolu reported.
The Metropolitan Police is investigating what it described as a “coordinated effort by the rally’s organisers to breach conditions imposed on the event.”
Corbyn, 75, and McDonnell, 73, who agreed to the interviews, voluntarily appeared at a police station in the capital yesterday afternoon.
After leaving the police station, the two MPs did not answer reporters’ questions.
Police also summoned three unnamed persons to give voluntary testimony as part of an “ongoing investigation”.
The rally, organised by the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) and its coalition partners, saw thousands gather in Whitehall after police blocked plans for a march from Portland Place, near the headquarters of the BBC.
Officers had imposed conditions under the Public Order Act restricting the protest to Whitehall, citing concerns over a potential “serious disruption” near a synagogue.
Police said a group of protesters broke through a police line to reach Trafalgar Square, where officers stopped them.
The Metropolitan Police posted a photo on social media showing a group that it said have forced its way through the police line being held at the northwest corner of Trafalgar Square.
Corbyn, however, disputed the account.
“This is not an accurate description of events at all,” he said in a post on X.
He said he was part of a delegation of speakers intending to lay flowers in memory of children killed in Gaza, which was “facilitated by the police”.
McDonnell echoed his comments.
“We did not force our way through. The police allowed us to go through, and when we stopped in Trafalgar Square, we laid our flowers down and dispersed.”
Nine people, including Corbyn’s brother Piers Corbyn, and Chris Nineham, a chief steward on the march, have been charged with public order offences and will appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court in the coming days.
The Met Police also confirmed that 24 people have been released on bail, while 48 remain in custody. Three other men aged 75, 73 and 61 have agreed to be interviewed under criminal caution.
The protest coincided with the announcement of a ceasefire and prisoner swap deal between Israel and Hamas.
Corbyn, who now sits as an independent member of parliament for Islington North, has been a vocal supporter of Palestinian rights.
McDonnell, the MP for Hayes and Harlington, also sits as an independent after Labour suspended the whip from him for six months in July 2024 over his vote against the government on child benefit rules.
The demonstration in London drew tens of thousands of supporters of Palestine, despite the police-imposed restrictions and banning of a previously agreed-upon route.
During the protest, 77 people were arrested.
Met Commander Adam Slonecki said security forces have been deployed for more than 20 national protests organised by the PSC since October 2023.
He highlighted that the number of arrests at yesterday’s rally marked the “highest number” recorded at such demonstrations during this period.
Dozens of Palestinian women, teens freed from Israeli jails as part of Gaza ceasefire

The Cradle | January 20, 2025
After several hours of delay following the handing over of three Israeli captives by Hamas’s Qassam Brigades, 90 Palestinian prisoners – all females and minors – were released from Israeli jails early on 20 January as part of the first phase of the ceasefire and exchange deal.
The Palestinians were released from Ofer prison in the occupied West Bank and Moscovia prison in Jerusalem, as well as the Damon prison.
Those from Ofer were dropped off by Red Cross buses at Beitunia north of Ramallah, where their families received them, and those from Moscovia went straight to their neighborhoods in occupied Jerusalem.
Among the prisoners was Abla Saadat, wife of the Secretary General of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) Ahmad Saadat. She was detained in September last year.
PFLP member Khalida Jarrar was also released. Jarrar had been in and out of Israeli prisons for several years and was detained for the fifth and final time in December 2023 after the start of the genocidal war in Gaza.
She was held in solitary confinement for the last six months of her detention despite suffering from serious medical issues, including deep vein thrombosis. Jarrar was in a state of exhaustion upon her release and was not able to speak to the media.
Palestinian journalist and prisoner activist Bushra al-Tawil was also among those released. She has been incarcerated seven times.
Rose Khweis, an 18-year-old who was also freed, told Reuters inmates were treated ”like animals” where she was imprisoned.
“The occupation forces were cursing us and treating us badly [during the release]. The occupation authorities contacted our families and warned them against any manifestations of joy,” Jenin Amro told Al Jazeera upon being discharged.
The next six weeks are meant to see the release of 2,000 Palestinians. Israel will discharge 30 to 50 prisoners for each captive released by Hamas. The first phase of the deal – which was announced last week – is supposed to see the release of 33 Israeli captives being held in Gaza. Negotiations for the second phase will begin 16 days into phase one.
Three Israeli captives were handed over to the Red Cross in Gaza on the afternoon of 19 January.
Huge crowds of Palestinians, along with a strong presence of Qassam Brigades fighters, gathered in Gaza City’s Al-Saraya Square as the three female Israeli captives were released and given over to the Red Cross.
The captives were retrieved by the Israeli army at the Reim Base outside Gaza.
How to Access TikTok After a Ban
Navigate TikTok bans with ease while keeping your online privacy intact
By Rick Findlay | Reclaim The Net | January 18, 2025
TikTok is one of the most popular social media platforms, with millions of users worldwide sharing short videos ranging from dance challenges to educational content. However, in some countries, TikTok is banned or restricted due to concerns over data privacy, national security, or cultural sensitivities. If you’re living in or traveling to one of these regions, a Virtual Private Network (VPN) can help you access TikTok safely and securely.
Here’s everything you need to know.
Why Is TikTok Banned in Some Countries?
TikTok has faced bans and scrutiny in several countries, primarily due to its ties to China and concerns about its data practices. TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance, is based in Beijing, and critics argue that this connection raises questions about the potential influence of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) on the platform.
Here are some key reasons why TikTok is banned or restricted in certain regions:
Data Privacy Concerns: TikTok collects vast amounts of user data, including location information, browsing habits, and device details. Governments in some countries fear that this data could be accessed by the Chinese government under China’s data-sharing laws.
National Security Risks: Authorities worry that TikTok’s data collection practices could pose a national security threat. For example, military personnel using TikTok might inadvertently expose sensitive information.
Censorship and Propaganda: Critics claim that TikTok may censor content unfavorable to the Chinese government or promote propaganda. This has fueled mistrust, especially in countries with strained relations with China.
Cultural Sensitivities: In some regions, TikTok has been criticized for hosting content deemed inappropriate or harmful to local values and traditions.
There are free VPNs out there that help you bypass censorship but also track you and your data. These VPNs are to be avoided.
We have a list of vetted and recommended VPNs for you here.
What Is a VPN and How Does It Work?
A VPN is a tool that encrypts your internet connection and routes it through servers located in different parts of the world. By using a VPN, you can hide your actual location and appear as though you’re accessing the internet from another country. This not only helps bypass geo-restrictions but also enhances your online privacy by masking your IP address.
When you connect to a VPN server in a country where TikTok is accessible, you can download, use, and enjoy TikTok without worrying about local restrictions.
Why Use a VPN for TikTok?
Bypass Regional Bans: Governments in some countries have banned TikTok entirely. A VPN allows you to bypass these bans by connecting to a server in a country where TikTok is not restricted.
Protect Your Privacy: A VPN encrypts your internet traffic, preventing your ISP or government from monitoring your online activities.
Access Content Globally: With a VPN, you can unlock TikTok content from other regions, giving you access to a wider range of videos and trends.
How to Access TikTok Using a VPN
Follow these steps to set up a VPN and access TikTok:
1. Choose a Reliable VPN Service
Not all VPNs are created equal. To access TikTok, you need a VPN with:
Servers in TikTok-friendly countries: Ensure the VPN has servers in countries where TikTok is not banned.
High-speed connections: TikTok’s video-heavy platform requires a VPN with fast speeds to avoid buffering.
Strong encryption: Look for a VPN that uses 256-bit encryption for maximum security.
There are other factors to consider when using a VPN – including using one that has open-source technology.
We have a list of vetted and recommended VPNs for you here.
2. Install the VPN App
Once you’ve chosen a VPN, download and install its app on your device. Most VPN services support multiple platforms, including iOS, Android, Windows, and macOS.
3. Connect to a TikTok-Friendly Server
Open the VPN app and select a server located in a country where TikTok is accessible. For example, if you’re in a region where TikTok is banned, you can connect to a server in the US or Europe. For best internet speed results, use a server in country that is close to your own.
Use TikTok on a Web Browser
In some cases, TikTok may be removed from app stores in certain regions, making it impossible to download or update the app. However, you can still access TikTok through its web version. Here’s how:
Open a web browser while connected to the VPN.
Visit TikTok’s official website at TikTok.com
Log in with your credentials or create a new account.
The web version allows you to browse videos, interact with content, and upload your own creations, providing a full TikTok experience without needing the app.
Important Tips for Using TikTok with a VPN
Select the Right Server: If one server doesn’t work, try connecting to a different one in the same region.
Stay Secure: Avoid free VPNs, as they often have limited servers, slower speeds, and weaker security features. Some free VPNs may even sell your data.
Check Local Laws: While using a VPN is legal in most countries, accessing banned platforms may violate local laws. Research the regulations in your area before proceeding.
Clear App Cache: If TikTok still doesn’t work after connecting to a VPN, clear the app’s cache or reinstall it while the VPN is active.
A VPN is a powerful tool for accessing TikTok in regions where it’s restricted, enabling you to stay connected to the platform’s vibrant community. By choosing a reliable VPN and following the steps outlined above, you can enjoy TikTok’s endless entertainment while safeguarding your privacy. Just remember to use VPNs responsibly and check the laws in your region.
YouTube Removes Barrister’s Legal Submission at Official UK Covid Inquiry Amid Censorship of Vaccine Injury Discussions
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | January 15, 2025
YouTube’s decision to remove a barrister’s legal submission from the UK Covid Inquiry has intensified concerns over widespread censorship of vaccine-related discussions on major social media platforms.
Anna Morris KC, who represents families claiming injury from Covid-19 vaccines, disclosed that YouTube deleted a video of her preliminary remarks to the inquiry in September 2023, citing violations of its medical “misinformation” policy. Although the platform later reinstated the video, it failed to provide a clear explanation, admitting only that “it sometimes makes mistakes.”
This act of censorship has been condemned as part of a larger pattern of silencing voices critical of vaccine safety and government health policies. As reported by The Telegraph, during the inquiry’s Module 4 session — focused on vaccines and pharmaceutical measures — Morris directly addressed this issue, stating, “The inquiry must understand the stigma and censorship for the vaccine injured and bereaved.”
She revealed that a poll of affected families found that 74% had been censored when discussing vaccine injuries on social media platforms.
Morris further criticized the suppression of information, noting that doctors were instructed to withhold concerns from both the public and their own patients. Her removed statement emphasized that “the treatment of the vaccine injured in this country has historically been a source of shame.”
Morris argued that those harmed by vaccines have been systematically “dismissed, ignored, censored,” and subjected to hostility when seeking acknowledgment and support.
She condemned the ongoing silencing of vaccine-injured individuals as a severe barrier to accountability and transparency, adding, “Unfortunately, this censorship has continued years after the pandemic and into our engagement with this inquiry.”
Despite repeated requests for a review, YouTube justified the video’s removal by citing its medical “misinformation” policies, a rationale that critics argue is increasingly being used to suppress legitimate concerns and experiences. This censorship has fueled calls for a reevaluation of how social media platforms regulate content related to public health, especially when it involves dissenting voices.
An emotional impact video shown during the inquiry highlighted the tragic story of pharmacist John Cross, who took his own life after suffering paralyzing complications from a Covid vaccine and being denied compensation. His story underscores the devastating consequences of dismissing those seeking recognition and support.



