Villains of Judea: Liora Rez’s Holy War Against Critics of Israel
Inside StopAntisemitism.org’s quest to make life miserable for those who dare criticize Israel

José Niño Unfiltered | January 2, 2026
Liora Rez, a professional Jewish agitator funded by shadowy donors, has built a lucrative career by branding critics of Israel as hate-filled bigots.
She emigrated to the United States as a Jewish refugee from what she describes as a thoroughly antisemitic environment in the Soviet Union. That early experience would become the foundation of her later activism against antisemitism.
But before Rez became one of the most controversial figures in pro-Israel activism, she had a very different public persona. Around 2012, she founded Jewish Chick Media Inc., a lifestyle brand focused on fashion and Jewish identity. As researcher Karl Radl documented, Rez pivoted from being a Jewish fashion and lifestyle influencer to a full-time pro-Israel activist following a 2016 trip to Israel with the Jewish Women’s Renaissance Project, now known as Momentum. At the time, she was navigating a contentious divorce in Connecticut, and the combination of circumstances prompted her decision to reinvent herself entirely.
In October 2018, Rez launched StopAntisemitism.org, an organization that would gain her great notoriety The group focuses on publicly calling out individuals it regards as antisemitic, using digital networks including the Internet, direct mail, and social media to reach millions. The organization’s stated mission is to publicly expose antisemitic behavior and ensure repercussions for those who, in their view, advocate hatred and violence against Jewish people.
Rez’s philosophy is blunt. She firmly believes that “antisemitism thrives when there are no consequences,” so her organization aims to create those consequences, which include job loss, suspensions, and public shaming for individuals they target. In testimony before Congress and numerous op-eds, Rez claims her group is “nonpartisan” and “grassroots,” mobilizing networks of activists to identify alleged antisemites and pressure institutions to discipline them.
The results, by Rez’s own account, have been dramatic. In an interview with the Jewish News Syndicate, she claimed that since the Hamas attacks of October 7, 2023, StopAntisemitism has “profiled more than 1,000 antisemites” and “over 400 of them have been fired” thanks to their pressure campaigns.
Harassing Israel critics is no cheap endeavor. Rez’s organization enjoys substantial financial backing from the Jewish community. The Milstein Family Foundation, led by real estate investor Adam Milstein and his wife Gila, is a key funder of StopAntisemitism.org. Tax records from 2022 reveal that the Merona Leadership Foundation—with Gila Milstein serving as president—compensated Rez with a $125,633 salary while allocating approximately $270,000 toward the organization’s operational costs.
At the core of Rez’s activism lies the premise that anti-Zionism and antisemitism are essentially identical. In a Jerusalem Post profile, she stated unequivocally: “Anti-Zionism is a contemporary form of antisemitism. We must fight this hate’s influence, especially on younger generations, to secure the future of the Jewish people in the US, in Israel and around the world.”
In her writing, Rez frequently emphasizes that Jews comprise just over 2% of the US population but are victims of “almost 60% of all US religious hate crimes,” using this statistic to justify an expansive definition of antisemitism. StopAntisemitism employs the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance working definition of antisemitism as its guide, which explicitly includes several anti-Israel positions—such as describing Israel as a racist endeavor—as examples of antisemitism. For Rez, hostility toward Israel functions as the primary vehicle for contemporary anti-Jewish hatred.
She views the “global wave of Jew hatred” that surfaced after Hamas’ October 7 attacks as justification for intensive monitoring of campuses, corporations, unions, hospitals, and government agencies. Rez identified college campuses as one of the most troubling environments, citing cases of Jewish students being singled out in libraries, professors openly celebrating Hamas and Hezbollah militants, demonstrators blocking building access, and university leadership remaining passive. “We stepped in,” she stated, adding a stern message: “If you target Jewish students, your actions won’t remain unseen.”
Her approach advocates aggressive public exposure of students and faculty, often tagging employers and prospective employers on social media to maximize professional consequences.
Perhaps nothing illustrates StopAntisemitism’s controversial approach better than its annual “Antisemite of the Year” competition, where the organization nominates a slate of figures and invites the public to vote. The contest has featured a mix of figures from the right, Holocaust deniers, and high-profile pro-Palestinian or anti-Zionist public figures, reinforcing critics’ claims that Rez collapses political opposition to Israel into the category of antisemitism.
Conservative commentator Tucker Carlson was named the 2025 “Antisemite of the Year” on December 21, 2025, marking the second consecutive year that StopAntisemitism selected a right-wing figure–Candace Owens was the recipient of this distinction in 2024–for this designation after years of predominantly awarding the title to left-wing personalities. Carlson competed against a diverse slate of nominees including UFC fighter Bryce Mitchell, social media personality Stew Peters, beloved children’s YouTuber Rachel Anne Accurso (“Ms. Rachel”), and “Sex and the City” star Cynthia Nixon.
Although Ms. Rachel did not receive StopAntisemitism’s designation, in 2025, StopAntisemitism launched what became one of its most controversial campaigns against her. The Jewish advocacy organizations went on the offensive after she posted about children in the Gaza Strip, called for an end to the blockade, and hosted Palestinian journalist Motaz Azaiza.
“Since 10/7, Ms. Rachel has pushed Hamas propaganda to millions – sharing debunked images, inflated casualty claims, and almost entirely ignoring Israeli child victims,” StopAntisemitism published on X. “She also hosted Motaz Azaiza, a terrorist sympathizer who celebrated the 10/7 massacre & openly idolizes Yahya Sinwar.”
Accurso publicly rejected the label, emphasizing her commitment to children’s well-being. Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) condemned the nomination, saying, “Ms. Rachel is a preschool teacher who speaks up for starving children in Gaza. That is not antisemitism. I hope thousands will join me in standing up for her.”
More recently, Rez has joined a right-wing Zionist campaign against newly-sworn New York City mayor Zohran Mamdani. She has warned that his election as NYC mayor would be “catastrophic” and portrayed him as part of a rabid anti-Israel left that would “take over every inch of NYC.”
Through her fanatic advocacy for Israel, Rez has gained substantial recognition within certain segments of the Jewish community. She testified before the U.S. House Small Business Committee in January 2024, where her official bio stressed her status as a Soviet Jewish refugee and described StopAntisemitism’s efforts to hold antisemites “accountable for their hateful actions.”
The Jewish newspaper Algemeiner has repeatedly listed her among the “Top 100 People Positively Influencing Jewish Life,” highlighting StopAntisemitism’s social media reach and their ability to deliver severe economic and social consequences against those who criticize the Jewish state.
The ultimate lesson of StopAntisemitism.org is that the movement’s true goal is not mutual respect, but total domination, enforcing a code of silence where gentile criticism is treated as a thought crime worthy of punishment.
Israel arrested 42 Palestinian journalists in 2025
MEMO | January 2, 2026
The Palestinian Journalists Syndicate said on Thursday that the Israeli army arrested 42 Palestinian journalists during 2025, including eight women, in the occupied West Bank, Jerusalem and inside what it called “the 1948 territories”.
In a report, the union said Israeli authorities continued a policy of systematic targeting through arbitrary and administrative detention, physical assault, deportation, seizure of equipment and forced interrogation. It said these actions aim to “silence coverage and break the national media structure”.
The syndicate’s freedoms committee warned of what it described as a “dangerous shift” in arrest practices. It said this includes focusing on the most influential journalists, repeatedly arresting the same journalist, expanding the use of administrative detention without charge, and using physical and psychological violence as a means of deterrence.
The report documented dozens of cases in which journalists were arrested while working in the field and covering military raids. It said this is used as a way to “empty the field of witnesses”.
The union also reported a rise in raids on journalists’ homes and their arrest from among their families, which it said is intended to “break them psychologically and socially”.
Polish Deputy Minister Urges EU Investigation Into TikTok Over Videos Promoting “Polexit”
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | January 1, 2026
A senior Polish official is pressing the European Commission to take action against TikTok, claiming the platform is hosting a growing number of artificial intelligence-generated videos that urge Poland to withdraw from the European Union.
His appeal, directed to Brussels’ top digital regulator, calls for what amounts to a censorship regime over AI-generated speech.
Deputy Minister of Digital Affairs Dariusz Standerski wrote to Executive Vice-President Henna Virkkunen, who oversees the EU’s Tech Sovereignty, Security, and Democracy portfolio, insisting that the European Commission open a Digital Services Act (DSA) investigation into TikTok.
He accused the company of failing to build “appropriate mechanisms” to detect and moderate AI-created content and of neglecting to provide “effective” transparency tools that could trace how such material is produced.
The letter went further, urging the Commission to introduce “interim measures aimed at limiting the further dissemination of artificial intelligence-generated content that encourages Poland to withdraw from the European Union.”

If interpreted literally, this would empower EU authorities to require large-scale filtering of political messages generated or enhanced by AI whenever they express skepticism toward EU membership.
Standerski also called for TikTok to produce a detailed internal report covering the supposed “disinformation,” including its scale, reach, and the steps taken to remove or suppress it.
Soon after his letter was publicized, Reuters reported that a TikTok account featuring “videos of young women dressed in Polish national colors and calling for Poland to leave the EU” had abruptly vanished from the platform.
TikTok, according to the report, had been “in contact with Polish authorities and removed content that violated its rules.”
That account, known online as Prawilne_Polki, had blended seemingly genuine clips with AI-generated ones, accumulating around 200,000 views and 20,000 likes within two weeks.
Polish-language outlets later confirmed that TikTok deleted Prawilne_Polki for breaching its terms of service.
Records suggest that Prawilne_Polki was originally created in May 2023 under a different name and was used for general entertainment videos until mid-December, when it was rebranded and began posting material about leaving the EU.
Reports describe it as part of a broader influence operation, though its removal appears to have been voluntary on TikTok’s part rather than the result of a formal EU order.
The significance of Standerski’s request lies less in the single account and more in the precedent it seeks.
His call for the EC to impose “measures limiting dissemination” would not distinguish between state-backed propaganda and ordinary user content.
Any AI-assisted meme, parody, or political joke about EU membership could be targeted under such a rule.
The DSA, already in effect, gives the European Commission extensive power to demand “systemic risk” assessments and impose moderation obligations on large online platforms.
Enforcement depends on algorithmic filters and opaque reporting systems that encourage platforms to err on the side of deletion rather than debate.
Treating AI-generated material as inherently suspect risks criminalizing or suppressing legitimate political commentary.
Once moderation directives are issued under the DSA, platforms often act preemptively to avoid fines, creating a censorship mechanism that needs no explicit ban.
TikTok has not clarified whether its removal of Prawilne_Polki was related to Standerski’s letter. Still, the sequence of events illustrates how political pressure can shape corporate moderation choices even before any formal legal process begins.
The Polish government’s push now places the European Commission in a position to decide whether “disinformation” about EU membership should be treated as a threat to democracy or as part of the democratic conversation itself.
The outcome could determine how much room remains for dissenting narratives in Europe.
As Israel bans aid orgs in Gaza, notorious mercenary firm seeks “Targeter”
Are Israel and US planning to revive the dystopian GHF scheme that spawned famine and death under cover of humanitarian aid?

By Max Blumenthal | The Grayzone | December 31, 2025
In its bid to continue the genocide in Gaza, Israel has banned 37 international aid organizations from entering the decimated, militarily occupied coastal enclave. This leaves only five humanitarian groups still able to operate inside Gaza.
At the same time, one of the US mercenary firms responsible for securing the notorious Gaza Humanitarian Foundation sites which were present during the worst periods of famine in Gaza, when at least 3000 Palestinian civilians were gunned down while seeking aid, has posted an ad soliciting former special forces soldiers for offensive operations.
UG Solutions, the scandal-stained private mercenary firm, announced this December that it was hiring an “experienced Targeter to support intelligence-driven operations through the identification, development, validation, and maintenance of operational targets.” The targeter will be expected to “Develop, validate, and maintain operational target packages in accordance with approved targeting processes.”
Anthony Aguilar, the retired United States Army Lt. Col and former Green Beret who blew the whistle on UG Solutions’ human rights abuses in Gaza, told me he believes that Israel’s ban on the 37 international aid organizations signals the return of UG Solutions as part of a restructured version of the Israeli-controlled Gaza Humanitarian Foundation scheme.
While it’s unclear where the UG Solutions targeter position will be deployed, if they are being hired for upcoming operations in Gaza, Aguilar says “this shows that the US, through paramilitary contractors, is now going to either directly target, or feed target data to the IDF.”

To set the stage for its blanket ban on international aid organizations, Israel’s intel-tied Ministry of Diaspora Affairs has demanded that all staffers of aid NGOs prove they do not support calls to boycott Israel, that they do not support armed struggle or oppose Israel’s existence as an exclusivist Jewish state, and that they do not “actively advance delegitimization activities against the State of Israel.”
Aid staffers must also demonstrate that they have never questioned the established history of the Holocaust or challenged official Israeli narratives about October 7 – including, presumably, that Palestinians committed “mass rape” or beheaded babies.
Israel has also demanded that Doctors Without Borders provide COGAT occupation administrators with the personal data of its staff and donors, an unprecedented move by a belligerent in a conflict which few, if any, aid groups could ever honor.
It seems obvious that the Israeli government is using the absurdly onerous new registration standards as cover to ban virtually every credible international aid organization from entering Gaza. In doing so, the apartheid entity seemingly seeks to deprive Palestinians living inside the yellow occupation line of sustenance, forcing them to leave Gaza, or to move into one of the high-tech, concentration camp-like “smart cities” mapped out in the dystopian new “Project Sunrise” proposal marketed by Trump cronies Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner.
And it is there that they would be “secured” by a mercenary outfit like UG Solutions – and targeted if they dared to resist.
Below is a list of all the aid orgs banned by Israel from operating in Gaza:
1. Accion contra el Hambre – Action Against Hunger
2. Action Aid
3. Alianza por la Solidaridad
4. Artsen zonder Grenzen (Medecins Sans Frontieres Nederland)
5. Campaign for the Children of Palestine (CCP Japan)
6. CARE
7. DanChurchAid
8. Danish Refugee Council
9. Handicap International – Humanity and Inclusion
10. Japan International Volunteer center
11. Medecins Du Monde (FRANCE)
12. Medecins du Monde Switzerland
13. Medecins Sans Frontières Belgium
14. Medecins Sans Frontieres France
15. Medicos del Mundo (Spain)
16. Mercy Corps
17. MSF Spain – Doctors Without Borders Spain
18. NORWEGIAN REFUGEE COUNCIL
19. Oxfam Novib
20. Premiere Urgence Internationale
21. Terre des hommes Lausanne
22. The International Rescue Committee (IRC)
23. WeWorld-GVC
24. World Vision International
25. Relief International
26. Fondazione AVSI
27. Movement for Peace – MPDL
28. American Friends Service Committee (AFSC)
29. Medico International
30. PSAS – The Palestine Solidarity Association in Sweden
31. Defense for Children International
32. Medical Aid for Palestinians – UK
33. Caritas Internationalis
34. Caritas Jerusalem
35. Near East council churches
36. OXFAM Quebec
37. War Child holland
Welcome To 2026: Europe Laying Groundwork For Climate Science Censorship!
By P Gosselin | No Tricks Zone | December 31, 2025
As EU narratives collapse, desparate leaders are planning more tyrannical measures to keep it all from sinking.
Currently, EU leaders are fuming that US officials would be so audacious as to accuse them of practicing censorship. Yet, when it comes to suppressing open discussions and differing viewpoints on major issues, things are in fact worse than most people think. And, it’s about to get even worse.
A recent (indirectly EU-funded) report released earlier this year shows how the EU is planning to broaden censorship to include the topics of climate and energy science.
In the “Harmful Environmental Agendas and Tactics” (HEAT) report, published by EU DisinfoLab and Logically, its authors investigate how climate-related misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation (MDM) are strategically used to undermine climate policy in Europe, specifically in Germany, France, and the Netherlands.
Climate science skeptics threaten democracy
The report argues that climate disinformation has moved beyond simple science denial and has become a tool for broader political and social polarization.
Outright denial of climate change, the authors claim, is being replaced by narratives focused on “climate delay.” These often acknowledge climate change but attack the feasibility, cost, and fairness of solutions, e.g., they claim green policies will bankrupt households or destroy industries.
The enemies
The report identifies four main pillars driving these agendas:
- The Conspiracy Milieu: Distrust of elites and “deep state” narratives (e.g., the “Great Reset”).
- Culture War/Partisan Discourse: Framing climate action as an authoritarian or elitist project.
- Hostile State Actors (HSAs): Significant involvement of Russian-linked networks (e.g., Portal Kombat) that use localized domains like Pravda DE to amplify divisive climate content.
- Big Oil Alignment: Narratives that align with fossil fuel interests, even if direct corporate attribution is often obscured.
In Germany, for example, there are attacks on the Energiewende (energy transition) and the Building Heating Act.
In France, there are links between climate policy and the “Yellow Vest” movement or anti-elitist sentiments.
Meanwhile, the “nitrogen crisis” has been reframed as “government land theft” in the Netherlands.
European leaders are convinced that their policies have nothing to do with all the failure going on. In their eyes, it’s all the fault of unruly citizens and their disinfoarmtion campaigns.
The report’s key recommendations
The authors call for decisive institutional and platform-level action to treat climate disinformation as a structural threat and a danger to democracy. This all needs to stop!
Platforms must act!
The primary recommendation is for the EU to explicitly recognize climate disinformation as a systemic risk under the Digital Services Act (a.k.a. by critics the Digital Censorship Act). This would force so-called Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs) to take proactive measures and conduct risk assessments.
The authors also call for mandating algorithm audits and public reporting on content moderation, specifically for climate content. It’s time to crack down on skeptics, they say.
“Independent” auditors
Moreover “independent researchers” are to be provided with access to disaggregated platform data to track how these narratives spread.
Another recommendation is calling for the labelling and limiting the reach of “ideological or sponsored” climate disinformation.
“Trusted flaggers”
The authors also are calling for greater monitoring of Russian-aligned and other hostile state operations that exploit climate debates to weaken EU democratic resilience.
Another step suggested to counter “climate disinformation” is the establishment of reporting channels for civil society organizations (so-called “trusted flaggers”) to flag coordinated inauthentic behavior (CIB) and harmful narratives to regulators.
“Prebunking”
Also “prebunking” campaigns aimed at proactively educating the public on disinformation tactics before they are exposed to them—especially in lower-educated rural and working-class areas that are frequently targeted.
The new German totalitarianism
The German liberal order resorts to totalitarianism to preserve the hegemony of its elites
By Raphael Machado | Strategic Culture Foundation | December 30, 2025
Mentioning “totalitarianism” in Germany quickly forces our minds to associate it with the Nazi period in that country’s history. 12 years during which Germany was under the command of Hitler and his party; a command that culminated in the Second World War and the greatest military hecatomb in human history. Indeed, historically, and thanks to figures like Hannah Arendt, the political category of “totalitarianism” has been restricted to the manifestations of illiberal political theories, such as fascism and communism. Liberalism, on the other hand, could not, it never could, it could never be totalitarian; that would be a “contradiction in terms.”
However, a closer look would quickly point out that many post-war Western philosophers, particularly Jewish ones like Karl Popper and Theodor Adorno, in dealing with attempts to understand Germany’s fascist turn, argued that legalistic concerns would have prevented the state from removing from the political game a political force, like Nazism, which very obviously intended to liquidate democracy and, therefore, put an end to the political game as such. This is the so-called “paradox of tolerance.” Popper, from the right, and Adorno, from the left, both agree in defending that the liberal-democratic state must be intolerant towards the “intolerant”; that is, to pursue, silence, and liquidate, without formalist concerns, any figure or political group that openly opposes the fundamental values of liberal democracy and human rights.
Very obviously, we can see that this is an attempt to philosophically legitimize the establishment of a totalitarian regime under the justification of defending “democracy” against fascists and/or communists. Despite its specific emphasis on rational deliberation, even Jürgen Habermas, the philosophical “pope” of German democratic liberalism, places the enemies of liberal society outside the umbrella of tolerant society, insofar as, if tolerated, they themselves would lead to the end of tolerant society.
The evident risk, nonetheless, lies in the decision that designates a figure, group, or ideology as “contrary to the liberal system.” In the 21st century, neither in Germany nor anywhere else in Europe, is there a serious and grave threat of the rise of openly fascist or communist political groups. Thus, at every moment, it is necessary to make a judgment about the possibility of an analogy between each political challenge to the existing order and the historical anti-liberal ideologies.
Since the definitions of fascism and communism are obviously imprecise (each theorist, each academic, etc., has their own definition of these ideologies), accusing an opponent of being “fascist” or “communist” is easy. And with that, it becomes possible to construct the possibility of silencing and excluding the opponent from the public sphere.
The German state, therefore, has all the necessary theoretical foundation to justify the persecution of citizens who oppose its designs and values.
And now it has the technical and legal means to discover who all the “enemies of tolerant society” are among its citizens.
In December 2025, the Berlin House of Representatives passed an amendment to the General Law on Security and Public Order that significantly expands state surveillance capabilities. The amendment introduces several tools that are, to say the least, controversial, such as authorizing police forces to install spyware on the smartphones and computers of “suspicious” citizens, as well as to intercept encrypted communications. If these actions are not feasible remotely, the new regulations allow police forces to secretly break into citizens’ homes to install the spyware physically.
Another innovation is the possibility for police forces to access traffic data from cell towers for all devices in a specific area and moment, without the need for specific judicial authorization. With this, the police could map the movements of any citizen during protests and public events. Furthermore, the legislation also authorizes the collected data to be used for training artificial intelligence systems.
This is a clear institutional slide toward totalitarianism. It is impossible to twist the narrative to deny, therefore, the possibility of liberalism also degenerating into totalitarianism, just as this possibility is recognized for fascism and communism. However, the regulations in question will only apply to the state of Berlin; it is not a change at the federal level.
But it may only be a matter of time. A similar bill is advancing in the Bundestag that promotes mass monitoring at the federal level, with the possibility of chat controls, weakening encryption, and digital and physical invasions of citizens’ property.
This intensification of state surveillance is no coincidence. It appears at a time when the legitimacy of the German liberal republic is being questioned by its citizens, disheartened by the achievements of recent decades, mass immigration, rising violence, and a clear effort by the government to push its citizens into a conflict with Russia. Questioned and under the threat of the rise of anti-system political forces, the German liberal order resorts to totalitarianism to preserve the hegemony of its elites.
WHO Instructs Governments to Track Online Anti-Vaccine Messaging in Real Time with AI: Journal ‘Vaccines’
Believe in vaccines or be targeted
By Jon Fleetwood | December 29, 2025
The World Health Organization (WHO) has demanded that governments surveil online information that questions the legitimacy of influenza vaccines and that they launch “countermeasures” against those who question the WHO’s vaccine dogma, in a November Vaccines journal publication.
The WHO’s largest funders are the U.S. government (taxpayers) and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
In the November publication, the WHO representatives do not argue for their beliefs in vaccines.
They do not attempt to interact with arguments against vaccines.
Instead, they call for governments to use artificial intelligence (AI) to monitor online opposition to injectable pharmaceuticals, and to develop ways to combat such opposition.
There is no persuasion, only doctrine.
The WHO paper reads:
“Vaccine effectiveness is contingent on public acceptance, making risk communication and community engagement (RCCE) an integral component of preparedness. The research agenda calls for the design of tailored communication strategies that address local sociocultural contexts, linguistic diversity, and trust dynamics.”
“Digital epidemiology tools, such as AI-driven infodemic monitoring systems like VaccineLies and CoVaxLies, offer real-time insight into misinformation trends, enabling proactive countermeasures.”
The WHO starts from the assumption that all vaccine skepticism is inherently false, pushing surveillance tools to track and catalog online dissent from those rejecting that creed.
The goal is not finding middle ground or even fostering dialogue.
It’s increasing vaccinations.
“The engagement of high-exposure occupational groups as trusted messengers is recommended to improve uptake.”
To accomplish this, governments “should” align “all” their messaging with the WHO’s denomination of vaccine faith.
“All messaging should align with WHO’s six communication principles, ensuring information is Accessible, Actionable, Credible, Relevant, Timely, and Understandable, to strengthen public trust in vaccination programmes.”
The WHO’s faith system requires not only that its own followers but also non-followers inject themselves with drugs linked to injuries, diseases, hospitalizations, and deaths.
If your posts online oppose that faith system, they are targeted and labeled as “misinformation.”
You require “behavioural intervention.”
You must be “counter[ed].”
“Beyond monitoring misinformation, participatory communication models that involve local leaders, healthcare workers, and veterinarians have shown measurable improvements in vaccine uptake and trust. Evidence-based behavioural interventions can complement these approaches to counter misinformation.”
The WHO is outlining an Orwellian control system where dissent is pathologized, belief is enforced by surveillance, and governments are instructed to algorithmically police thought in service of pharmaceutical compliance.
Ireland’s Simon Harris to Push EU-Wide Ban on Social Media Anonymity
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | December 29, 2025
Ireland’s next term leading the European Union will be used to promote a new agenda: an effort to end online anonymity and make verified identity the standard across social media platforms.
Tánaiste Simon Harris said the government plans to use Ireland’s presidency to push for EU-wide rules that would require users to confirm their identities before posting or interacting online.
Speaking to Extra.ie, Harris described the plan as part of a broader attempt to defend what he called “democracy” from anonymous abuse and digital manipulation.
He said the initiative will coincide with another policy being developed by Media Minister Patrick O’Donovan, aimed at preventing children from accessing social media.
O’Donovan’s proposal, modeled on Australian restrictions, is expected to be introduced while Ireland holds the EU presidency next year.
Both ideas would involve rewriting parts of the EU’s Digital Services Act, which already governs how online platforms operate within the bloc.
Expanding it to require verified identities would mark a major shift toward government involvement in online identity systems, a move that many privacy advocates believe could expose citizens to new forms of monitoring and limit open speech.
Harris said his motivation comes from concerns about the health of public life, not personal grievance.
Harris said he believes Ireland will find allies across Europe for the initiative.
He pointed to recent statements from French President Emmanuel Macron and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who he said have shown interest in following Australia’s lead. “If you look at the comments of Emmanuel Macron… of Keir Starmer… recently, in terms of being open to considering what Australia have done… You know this is a global conversation Ireland will and should be a part of,” he said.
Technology companies based in Ireland, many of which already face scrutiny under existing EU rules, are likely to resist further regulation.
The United States government has also expressed growing hostility toward European efforts to regulate speech on its major tech firms, recently imposing visa bans on several EU officials connected to such laws.
Despite this, Harris said Ireland does not want confrontation. “This is a conversation we want to have now. We don’t want to have it in an adversarial way. Companies require certainty too, right?” he said, emphasizing that Ireland remains committed to being a reliable home for international tech firms.
He also spoke in support of O’Donovan’s age-verification proposal, comparing it to other legal age limits already enforced in Ireland. “We have a digital age of consent in Ireland, which is 16, but it’s simply not being enforced,” he said.
From a civil liberties standpoint, mandatory identity checks could fundamentally alter the online world.
Requiring proof of identity to speak publicly risks silencing individuals who rely on anonymity for safety, including whistleblowers, activists, and those living under political pressure.
Once created, systems of digital identity are rarely dismantled and can easily be adapted to track or restrict speech.
Harris said that voluntary cooperation by technology companies could make legislation unnecessary. “These companies are technology companies. They have the ability to do more, without the need for laws,” he said, suggesting platforms could use their own tools to manage bots, algorithms, and age verification.
Italy arrests Palestinian activist amid crackdown on anti-Israel voices

Palestinian activist Mohammed Hannoun
Press TV – December 28, 2025
Italian authorities have detained prominent Palestinian activist Mohammed Hannoun as European countries mount a crackdown on voices exposing Israel’s genocidal crimes against the oppressed nation.
Hannoun, president of the Palestinian Association in Italy, was arrested along with eight other people on Saturday for allegedly financing the Palestinian Hamas resistance group through charities.
In a statement, prosecutors claimed that the activist is the “head of the Italian cell of the Hamas organization.”
They also alleged that the suspects had sent about 7 million euros ($8.2 million) to “associations … owned, controlled, or linked to Hamas.”
However, Hannoun’s lawyer Fabio Sommovigo said that the funds were collected peacefully for humanitarian purposes, adding that the case was based on the Israeli authorities’ interpretation of money movements.
Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, who has faced backlash for her pro-Israel stance during the regime’s genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, expressed her “appreciation and satisfaction” for the arrest operation.
Born in Jordan in 1962, Hannoun has been residing in the Italian port city of Genoa for many years.
He is an architect by profession and has organized and taken part in public demonstrations, solidarity initiatives, and awareness campaigns in support of the Palestinian cause.
He had previously described Hamas as a legitimate political actor, saying, “I am simply a Palestinian who has been engaged for decades in the struggle for the rights of his people. Hamas received more than 70 percent of the vote in Gaza and the West Bank, so it is a legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. And I am a sympathizer of Hamas, just as I am of every faction that fights for my rights.”
The arrests come at a time when certain European countries have stepped up efforts to silence pro-Palestinian activists and groups through judicial proceedings, forced dissolutions, and account freezes.
The same European states are complicit in Israel’s war crimes as they maintain their economic and military ties with the criminal regime, which has killed 71,266 Palestinians, mostly women and children, in Gaza since October 7, 2023.
NSW Premier Admits New “Security” Bill Restricts Civil Liberties, Promises More “Hate Speech” Laws Ahead
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | December 27, 2025
Lawmakers in New South Wales wrapped up the year by rushing through security legislation that broadens police powers and imposes new limits on protest activity and expression.
Passed in an extraordinary sitting of Parliament just before Christmas, the Terrorism and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 represents one of the most far-reaching state security expansions in recent years.
Under the new law, the display of a symbol belonging to a “prohibited terrorist organization” can now lead to a prison term of up to two years.
Police officers are also granted authority to order individuals to remove face coverings if they are attending a demonstration or public event and the officer “reasonably suspects” they may commit an offense.
The legislation also permits police to halt public gatherings in the aftermath of a terrorist attack.
Although the bill is not framed as a censorship measure, it introduces powers that could intersect with the expanding use of surveillance technologies.
By compelling people to show their faces during political demonstrations, the law effectively weakens the ability of citizens to shield themselves from biometric tracking at a time when facial recognition systems are increasingly used by both law enforcement and private entities.
Premier Chris Minns has openly acknowledged that the law curtails individual freedoms. “These are extraordinary measures, I acknowledge that. I know that not all Australians that live in NSW support these changes, but we have decided it’s the best way of ensuring we do everything possible to keep the people of NSW safe,” he said following the bill’s passage.
Minns further conceded that the process was accelerated, crediting bipartisan cooperation for allowing the legislation to pass so quickly. “I know that that happened in a short space of time. I know that the negotiations and the talks had to happen over a short space of time, but we appreciate the goodwill in which we were able to get much-needed reform in New South Wales through the Parliament,” he stated.
He justified the timing by saying, “We couldn’t wait, this was urgent.”
When pressed about why the measures were bundled into a single omnibus bill, Minns admitted that time was the deciding factor. “If it had been cut up into its component parts, we would have been here way past Christmas… maybe people who oppose elements of those changes would have loved that, because it would have meant that the passage of the bills would have been stalled.”
The Premier did not shy away from admitting that rights were being limited in the process. “I accept, I guess, the implicit criticism that this does restrict rights, whether it’s for protests or guns,” he said. “But in these circumstances, we’ve got a higher obligation to the public… our number one obligation is to keep the public safe.”
Minns also signaled that more legislation is on the horizon, confirming that the government intends to introduce new “hate speech” laws in the coming months. “I want to make it clear that this isn’t the end of change… we’re currently looking at other areas of the law that are urgently required to confront hate speech, confront Islamist terrorism in our community,” he said. “Hate speech leads to hateful actions… and we’re prepared to take action and steps to keep the community safe.”
While the Premier frames the agenda as necessary to safeguard citizens, the process reflects a deeper shift toward governance by emergency.
Parliament’s decision to fast-track legal powers during a holiday recess, without full debate or public review, raises serious questions about transparency and proportionality.
The rapid normalization of police discretion over identity and assembly carries lasting implications for privacy and dissent.
As soon as governments assert the right to define and control “hate speech” or to compel identification at protests, the boundaries of lawful expression narrow quickly. A response to terrorism may end up reshaping the basic relationship between the individual and the state.
More: Victoria Moves to Force Online Platforms to ID Users and Expand State Powers to Curb “Hate Speech”
US Under Secretary of State Slams UK and EU Over Online Speech Regulation, Announces Release of Files on Past Censorship Efforts
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | December 27, 2025
American Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy Sarah Rogers has sharply criticized British and European speech regulators for attempting to extend their laws to US-based platforms, calling it a direct challenge to the First Amendment.
Speaking during an appearance on The Liz Truss Show, Rogers said Washington intends to respond to the UK’s communications regulator Ofcom after it sought to bring the website 4chan under its jurisdiction.
She said the situation “forced” the US to defend its constitutional protections, warning that “when British regulators decree that British law applies to American speech on American sites on American soil with no connection to Britain,” the matter can no longer be ignored.
Rogers called it “a perverse blessing” that the dispute is forcing a renewed transatlantic conversation about free expression, observing that “Britain and America did develop the free speech tradition together.”
Rogers announced that the State Department will soon publish a collection of previously unreleased internal emails and documents describing earlier US government involvement in social media moderation efforts.
The release is part of what she termed a “truth and reconciliation initiative” that will include material linked to the now-defunct Global Engagement Center, which she said had coordinated with outside organizations to identify content for takedown.
That operation was “immediately dismantled” after she assumed her current post.
She argued that foreign governments have moved from cooperation to coercion in their dealings with US companies. “Europe and the UK and other governments abroad are… trying to nullify the American First Amendment by enforcing against American companies and American speakers and American soil,” Rogers said, referring to the EU’s fine against X and Ofcom’s recent enforcement campaigns.
On domestic policy, she criticized the UK’s Online Safety Act, saying that it is being sold as child protection legislation but in practice functions as a speech control measure.
“These statutes are just censoring adult political speech is not the best way to protect kids and it’s probably the worst way,” she said.
Rogers noted that under such laws, even parliamentary remarks about criminal networks could be censored if regulators deem them harmful.
Turning to Ofcom’s ongoing 4chan case, Rogers said its legal position effectively claims authority over purely American websites.
She offered a hypothetical: “I could go set up a website in my garage… about American political controversies… and Ofcom’s legal position nonetheless is that if I run afoul of British content laws, then I have to pay money for the British government.”
Rogers said she expects the US government to issue a response soon.
Throughout the interview, Rogers framed the current wave of global online regulation as an effort to suppress what she called “chaotic speech” that emerges with every major communications shift.
“People panic and they want to shove that innovation back in the bottle,” she said, warning that such attempts have “never worked.”
Her remarks mark one of the strongest rebukes yet from a senior American official toward the growing European model of compelled content moderation.
Rogers suggested that this model not only undermines open debate but also sets a precedent for governments worldwide to police political speech beyond their borders.
More: EU Launches New Push For Digital ID Age Checks and Big Tech Probe Under Digital Services Act

