Israel used American weapons in ‘deliberate’ strike on journalists in Lebanon: Report
Press TV – November 25, 2024
An Israeli airstrike using American weapons that killed three journalists in southern Lebanon in October is likely to have been deliberate, amounting to a potential war crime, an investigation has shown.
The Guardian reported on Monday that experts in international humanitarian law have encouraged further investigation.
“All the indications show that this would have been a deliberate targeting of journalists: a war crime,” said Nadim Houry, a human rights lawyer and executive director of the Arab Reform Initiative.
“This was clearly delineated as a place where journalists were staying.”
During the early hours of October 25, an Israeli warplane dropped two bombs on a chalet hosting journalists.
The victims included cameraman Ghassan Najjar and technician Mohammad Reda from Lebanon-based al-Mayadeen network as well as cameraman Wissam Qassem from the al-Manar channel. They were killed in their sleep.
There was no fighting in the area before or at the time of the strike.
The Guardian found no evidence of the presence of Hezbollah military infrastructure at the site.
After the strike, the Israeli military claimed it had struck a “Hezbollah military structure.”
A few hours later, the regime said the incident was “under review” following reports that journalists were hit.
A day after Israel began its ground aggression inside Lebanon, a group of about 18 journalists arrived at a guest house resort in the southern village resort of Hasbaya.
The journalists drove cars marked with “Press” and wore flak jackets and helmets emblazoned with press symbols.
They said the presence of Israeli reconnaissance drones was “constant” over both the live location and the guest house during their 23-day stay.
“On the night of the attack, we were sitting in front of the chalets and the drone was flying super low on top of us,” said Fatima Ftouni, a journalist at al-Mayadeen who was staying a few chalets down from her colleagues when they were struck.
The resort is owned by Lebanese-American Anoir Ghaida, who said he searched the chalet and car of the targeted journalists after the strike “like you would search for a needle in a haystack” but found “nothing suspicious” about the journalists.
Based on interviews with survivors and available evidence, Israel used “an air-dropped bomb equipped with a United States-produced” Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) guidance kit.
The JDAM is piece of equipment that turns unguided bombs into precision-guided munitions.
Sana Najjar, Ghassan Najjar’s wife, said in an interview with the Guardian that Ghassan left behind a three-and-a-half-year-old son.
“Ghassan was not a member of Hezbollah, he was a member of the press. He never had a gun, not even for hunting. His weapon was his camera.”
Regardless of their political affiliation, killing journalists is illegal under international humanitarian law unless they are actively participating in military activities.
Janina Dill, co-director of the Oxford Institute for Ethics, Law and Armed Conflict, said, “It is a dangerous trend already witnessed in Gaza that journalists are linked to military operations in virtue of their assumed affiliation or political leanings, then seemingly become targets of attack. This is not compatible with international law.”
House of Representatives Approves Legislation Threatening Nonprofits’ Free Speech
By Adam Dick | Ron Paul Institute | November 22, 2024
On Thursday, the United States House of Representatives approved legislation that would threaten nonprofit organizations’ exercise of free speech rights. The legislation would accomplish this goal by empowering the US government to selectively clamp down on nonprofits to an extent that targeted organizations may cease to exist. This is all being done in the name of countering terrorism, a trusty standby excuse for the US government exercising authoritarian powers.
The House approved the Stop Terror-Financing and Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act (HR 9495) by a vote of 219 to 184. The “yes” votes came mainly from Republican members, and all the “no” votes were from Democrats plus Kentucky Republican Thomas Massie, an Advisory Board member for the Ron Paul Institute.
J.D. Tuccille provided an informative critique of HR 9495 in a Friday Reason article. The bill, explained Tuccille, “allows for the ‘termination of tax-exempt status of terrorist supporting organizations.’” Continuing, Tuccille wrote:
The designation of organizations as such is left to the discretion of the Secretary of the Treasury, based on that official’s judgment that a non-profit group has, in the last three years, provided ‘material support or resources’ to what the U.S. government considers a terrorist organization. The language provides for a 90-day window during which time supposed ‘terrorist supporting organizations’ can appeal the designation, but the burden is on them to prove that they’re not guilty.
This turns due process on its head.
The threat from this new bureaucratic power is extreme for targeted organizations. As Tuccille puts it in his article, the loss of “tax -exempt status” is essentially a death penalty for most non-profit organizations.”
What a censorship power this legislation hands over to the executive branch bureaucracy. Nonprofit organizations whose activities challenge the ambitions of the US government and connected individuals, businesses, and organizations, can be snuffed out. Meanwhile, other organizations will have a big incentive to limit their own speech to avoid being similarly targeted for destruction.
During the House floor debate on HR 9495, Rep. Mark Takano (D-CA) presented a brief, persuasive speech against the bill. Here is the text of his speech:
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 9495. As Members of Congress, it is our duty to stand against terrorism and stand up for our common values, but this bill does neither.
What does it do?
What it does is grant sweeping draconian powers to the executive branch to essentially shut down any nonprofit.
On what basis would future administrations, Democratic or Republican, be able to exercise such power?
On a mere accusation.
I repeat, an accusation.
All nonprofits could be under scrutiny. These are decent people who are advocating on issues from religious freedom to animal welfare.
Mr. Speaker, why would conservatives, the very same people who gnashed their teeth at executive overreach, support such a measure?
Why would they suddenly about-face and sacrifice the values they claim to stand for?
It is because this is a gift to the President-elect, Mr. Trump, wrapped up in a bow right before the holidays.
On the campaign trail, he has made no secret of who he would seek to go after. This is bigger than the President-elect because now every President who would be king would be free to seek vengeance on their political opponents for every perceived slight.
I caution my colleagues to consider how far-reaching the consequences of this bill would be. This bill would apply to all future Presidents.
At a time when we should be strengthening our checks and balances and shoring up our guardrails, this legislation would do the opposite.
Mr. Speaker, in the strongest possible terms, I urge my colleagues to vote against this executive branch power grab.
This legislative threat to nonprofit organizations and their free speech can be expected to be rejected by the Democratic controlled Senate and President Joe Biden. But, it will likely be back for another go-round under more amenable conditions come January when the House, Senate, and presidency are all in Republican control.
EU will continue to block €19.2 billion in funds for Hungary
Remix News | November 20, 2024
In a new report from the EU Observer entitled, “Billions of EU funds to remain frozen as Hungary fails to reform,” top EU officials stated that Hungary will continue to be blocked from the €19.2 billion in EU funds owed to the country.
The outgoing European Commissioner for Justice, Didier Reynders, while speaking to the outlet, confirmed that Hungary’s funds will remain frozen. He stated that concerns about Hungary still exist because the draft texts submitted by Budapest do not address what he vaguely refers to as “conflicts of interest.”
“The current state of play of relevant developments in Hungary demonstrate that important concerns still persist,” he said.
The EU Observer report also notes that the Child Protection Act from Hungary is a factor in blocking funds. The act stops LGBT topics from being taught in public schools and blocks gender reassignment surgeries to safeguard children.
The outlet notes that on Tuesday, “a hearing at the Court of Justice in Luxembourg saw 16 member states and the European Commission confront Hungary over its anti-LGBTQ law.”
“This is a frontal and serious attack on the rule of law, and more generally on European society,” a lawyer representing the European Commission told the court, according to AFP.
As European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen outlined in a speech in January of this year, Hungary’s €20 billion would remain frozen until the country opens its borders. It was one of the clearest references to the fact that Hungary’s strict border policy, which is now increasingly mainstream in Europe, is one of the sole reasons behind the frozen money. However, other issues such as LGBT also remain at the top of the agenda for the EU.
Once the government in Poland was changed and the left-liberal Donald Tusk became prime minister, the country’s money was quickly unfrozen. The EU is now wielding EU funds as a powerful tool to attack governments Brussels deems to be political enemies.
Von der Leyen stated once Tusk came to power, that she was “impressed” by his efforts to “restore the rule of law.”
Tusk has taken over public television stations in violation of Polish law, imprisoned political opponents, and completely ignored court orders.
“Shutting Down CISA” Senator Rand Paul’s Crusade Against Online Censorship
By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | November 19, 2024
Senator Paul Rand, who is about to take over as chair of the US Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, has spoken in favor of shutting down the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA).
CISA, a part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), was established in 2018 to do just what its name says – but has in the meanwhile become weaponized to suppress free speech, opponents believe, citing a number of programs where CISA was involved in monitoring and flagging online posts for removal.
Senator Paul refers to the agency’s behavior – which he says included the ability to censor content and thus influence what information is available to people – as “intrusions into the First Amendment.”
“The First Amendment is important, that’s why we listed it as the First Amendment. I’d like to, at the very least, eliminate their ability to censor content online,” Paul said in a post on X.
The senator was referencing his previous statements made for Politico, when he revealed he is in favor of shuttering CISA completely, while at the same time conceding that this is “unlikely” to happen – but also promising there will be hearings, as the incoming committee starts probing this government entity “working” with social media.
According to Politico, Democrats in Congress would react “fiercely” against any attempt not only to dismantle but also to limit CISA’s powers.
CISA representatives, like senior adviser Ron Eckstein, continue to claim that the agency is merely doing its job, without ever overstepping the mandate and engaging in censorship. Quite the contrary, Eckstein told the press – according to him, CISA is in fact protecting Americans’ “freedom of speech, civil rights, civil liberties, and privacy.”
Taking into account what has come to light regarding CISA’s activities over the past four years in particular, that is an extraordinary claim, and one Senator Paul clearly disagrees with.
Even though established under President Trump’s first administration, CISA assumed an active role around the highly contentious 2020 election, allegedly to suppress those voicing their concerns online about the legitimacy of the vote.
CISA and legacy media supporting the policies the agency is executing – or has been until now – describe this as “countering domestic disinformation,” and suggest that CISA is these days more focused on fighting back adversaries from abroad.
Rant: This Isn’t Scientific, and It Isn’t American
Truthstream Media | November 10, 2024
Truthstream Media Can Be Found Here:
Our First Film: TheMindsofMen.net
Our First Series: Vimeo.com/ondemand/trustgame
Site: TruthstreamMedia.com X: @Truthstream
News Backup Ch: Vimeo.com/truthstreammedia
DONATE: http://bit.ly/2aTBeeF
Newsletter: http://eepurl.com/bbxcWX
Study Showing ‘High Likelihood’ of Link Between COVID Vaccines and Death Republished in Peer-reviewed Journal
By Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D. | The Defender | November 18, 2024
The largest COVID-19 vaccine autopsy study to date has been republished in a peer-reviewed journal — after twice being censored, according to Nicolas Hulscher, the paper’s lead author and an epidemiologist at the McCullough Foundation.
Science, Public Health Policy and the Law on Nov. 17 published the study, which had been previously withdrawn from Preprints with The Lancet and Forensic Science International.
Hulscher told The Defender the study’s republication signals a “pivotal victory for transparency and accountability in science.” It also marks “a significant setback” for actors in the biopharmaceutical complex and “their Academic Publishing Cartel,” Hulscher said.
Hulscher’s co-authors include Dr. Harvey Risch, Dr. Peter A. McCullough and Dr. William Makis.
Hulscher told The Defender the study provides “robust evidence that COVID-19 vaccines can cause death. This means that the FDA’s [U.S. Food and Drug Administration] criteria for a Class I recall have been fulfilled, warranting an immediate market withdrawal.”
The FDA defines a Class I product recall as “a situation in which there is a reasonable probability that the use of or exposure to a violative product will cause serious adverse health consequences or death.”
Risch, professor emeritus of epidemiology at the Yale School of Public Health, told The Defender that the COVID-19 vaccine spike protein “can stay around in some people and continue to do inflammatory damage in any site where it gets to through the bloodstream.”
In ‘striking act of censorship’ publishers withdraw study, shut down debate
The study’s publication in Science, Public Health Policy and the Law is the latest twist in an ongoing saga as the authors have tried to get their research out to the public and scientific community, Hulscher wrote on Substack.
The study results were first made public on July 5, 2023, as a preprint with The Lancet on SSRN, an open-access research platform.
However, Preprints with The Lancet removed the study from the server within 24 hours, posting a statement that the study’s conclusions were “not supported by the study methodology,” The Daily Sceptic reported.
McCullough told The Epoch Times that the study was experiencing “hundreds of reviews per minute” before its removal.
Preprint servers offer a place for the public to view scientific reports and papers while they undergo peer review, making scientific findings available immediately and for free and opening them up to broader public debate.
The authors subsequently posted on the Zenodo preprint server, while the review underwent peer review at Forensic Science International. It was downloaded over 130,000 times.
On June 21, 2024, after successful peer review, Forensic Science International published the study.
Within weeks, the study became the top trending research paper worldwide across all subject areas, according to the Observatory of International Research, Hulscher recalled.

“Unfortunately,” Hulscher wrote on Substack, “in a striking act of censorship, Elsevier and Forensic Science International withdrew the article on August 2nd, 2024 in flagrant violation of their own withdrawal policy and COPE guidelines.”
He said they “left no traces behind, completely wiping our paper from the webpage.”
Elsevier and Forensic Science International said that “members of the scientific community” — who remained anonymous, Hulscher pointed out — cited numerous concerns about the study, including inappropriate citation references, inappropriate methodological design and a lack of factual support for its conclusions.
The concerns were “unfounded,” Hulscher wrote. The study authors wrote a rebuttal defending their study and submitted a revised manuscript. However, Elsevier and Forensic Science International rejected the revised manuscript.
Hulscher noted that Elsevier and Forensic Science International “failed to follow the proper scientific discourse method of allowing debate in Letters to the Editor.” Instead, they shut down the possibility of debate by censoring the study.
“This type of academic censorship poses a serious threat to the progress of scientific discovery,” he said.
73.9% of deaths reviewed by authors linked to COVID vaccines
As The Defender previously reported, the study authors did a systematic review of studies on autopsy findings following COVID-19 vaccination.
They first searched PubMed and ScienceDirect for all published autopsy and necropsy — another word for autopsy — reports related to COVID-19 vaccination in which the death occurred after vaccination.
They screened out 562 duplicate studies among the 678 studies initially identified in their search. Other papers were removed because they lacked information about vaccination status.
Ultimately, they evaluated 44 papers containing 325 autopsies and one necropsy case. Three physicians independently reviewed each case and adjudicated whether or not the COVID-19 shot was the direct cause or contributed significantly to the death reported.
They found 240 of the deaths (73.9%) were found to be “directly due to or significantly contributed to by COVID-19 vaccination.” The mean age for death was 70.4 years old.
Primary causes of death included sudden cardiac death, which happened in 35% of cases, pulmonary embolism and myocardial infarction, which occurred in 12.5% and 12% of the cases respectively.
Other causes included vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia, myocarditis, multisystem inflammatory syndrome and cerebral hemorrhage.
Most deaths occurred within a week of the last shot.
The authors concluded that because the deaths were highly consistent with the known mechanisms for COVID-19 vaccine injury, it was highly likely the deaths were causally linked to the vaccine.
They said the findings “amplify” existing concerns about the vaccines, including those related to vaccine-induced myocarditis and myocardial infarction and the effects of the spike protein more broadly.
They also said the studies have implications for unanticipated deaths among vaccinated people with no previous illness. “We can infer that in such cases, death may have been caused by COVID-19 vaccination,” they wrote.
The authors acknowledged some potential biases in the article.
First, they said, their conclusions from the autopsy findings are based on an evolving understanding of the vaccines, which are currently different from when the studies evaluated were published.
They also noted that systematic reviews have bias potential in general because of biases that may exist at the level of the individual papers and their acceptance into the peer-reviewed literature.
They said publication bias could have affected their results because the global push for mass vaccination has made investigators hesitant to report adverse events.
They also said their research did not account for confounding variables like concomitant illnesses, drug interactions and other factors that may have had a causal role in the reported deaths.
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
Russian journalist killed by Ukrainian drone strike

Yulia Kuznetsova © VK
RT | November 18, 2024
The editor-in-chief of a local newspaper in Russia’s Kursk Region, was killed in a Ukrainian drone strike on Sunday, Governor Aleksey Smirnov has said. Yulia Kuznetsova, joined the Narodnaya Gazeta paper in 2008 and was promoted to editor-in-chief last summer.
She was traveling by car along the Dyakonovo–Sudzha highway when an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) struck. The 34-year-old was accompanied by a colleague and a police officer, both of whom sustained injuries and were taken to hospital for treatment.
“Today, in the Bolshesoldatsky District, the Editor-in-Chief of Narodnaya Gazeta, Yulia Nikolaevna Kuznetsova, was killed as a result of a Ukrainian drone attack on a car,” Governor Smirnov wrote on his Telegram channel on Sunday, expressing his condolences. Kuznetsova had been transporting archive documents from the regional office and was planning to report on the situation in the area, he added.
Despite being evacuated from her hometown, Kuznetsova continued to run the newspaper from Kursk, giving readers an insight into what was happening in their home district.
Kuznetova is survived by her husband and two children. The Russian Investigative Committee has launched a criminal probe on charges of terrorism over the killing.
Several Russian journalists covering the fighting in Ukraine have been targeted by Kiev’s forces since the conflict escalated in February 2022.
In September, Russian war correspondent Aleksandr Korobov was ambushed and fatally injured by Ukrainian soldiers while reporting on shelling incidents in Belgorod Region. The same month, Evgeny Poddubny, a veteran correspondent for the Russia-1 TV channel, was wounded when a Ukrainian kamikaze drone hit his car while he was covering hostilities in the Kursk Region.
Moscow has accused the Ukrainian military of deliberately attacking the press, and Russian President Vladimir Putin has said “at least 30” journalists have been killed since the beginning of the conflict.
Former Biden Press Sec. Psaki Demands New Laws to Curb Online “Disinformation” After Harris Loss
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | November 18, 2024
Former White House press secretary, notorious for saying that the Biden administration had been flagging social media posts for “misinformation” recently voiced concerns on the Next Question podcast with Katie Couric about the pervasive spread of “disinformation” on social media, attributing it as a significant factor in Vice President Kamala Harris’s electoral defeat to President-elect Donald Trump. Psaki called for legislative changes to enhance accountability for social media platforms.
“One of the things that’s changed even since I got involved in politics is just the rise of the percentage of people who get their information off of platforms that have no fact-checking mechanism and no accountability for having disinformation spread,” Psaki said.
During their discussion, Psaki lamented the evolution of information dissemination, noting the increasing reliance on platforms free of legacy control. She highlighted the discrepancy in standards between local TV and social media, stating, “Local TV is held to a higher standard of accountability than social media platforms in terms of accurate information on their platforms. That is crazy!”
Psaki added, “Laws have to change. I don’t even know the entire answer to it but that seems to me to be a core issue.”
Psaki didn’t mention the First Amendment.
German Man is Raided By Police For Calling Pro-Censorship Vice Chancellor an “Idiot”
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | November 18, 2024
Yet another event in Germany has raised major concerns about freedom of speech. A 64-year-old pensioner from the Bavarian town of Bamberg found himself at the center of a legal storm after he posted a meme on social media that depicted pro-censorship Vice Chancellor Robert Habeck as a “Schwachkopf Professional” or “professional idiot.” This action prompted a police raid on his home where his computer and phone were seized.

The offending image
The prosecutors statement said: “At a time that cannot currently be specified in more detail in the days or weeks before June 20, 2024, the accused published an image file using the account that shows a portrait of Federal Minister of Economics Robert Habeck with the title ‘Schwachkopf PROFESSIONAL’, based on the advertising campaign of the Schwarzkopf company, in order to generally defame Robert Habeck and to make it more difficult for him to work as a member of the federal government.”
The raid occurred in August, early in the morning when police officers entered the home of Stefan Niehoff, waking him and his family, which includes his wife and daughter. Niehoff, who had simply shared a meme that humorously altered a beauty care brand’s logo to feature Habeck, expressed his disbelief over the raid. He likened the aggressive enforcement to tactics used during the Communist era in East Germany.
This police action stemmed from a criminal complaint filed by Habeck himself, reacting to what he considered defamation that hindered his governmental duties. German law, refined during the tenure of the former Chancellor Angela Merkel, allows public officials to pursue criminal charges against perceived slanders relating to their official roles. Violations could result in fines or up to three years in prison.
The Vice Chancellor, along with other members of the Green party, has been an active participant in utilizing this law. Reports from the news outlet Junge Freiheit indicate that Habeck’s legal team continuously monitors social media for similar offenses, having filed 805 criminal complaints to date. His colleague, Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock, has filed 453 such complaints.
Habeck, who wishes to become Germany’s leader, recently called for more online censorship, also calling for “the regulation of algorithms, of X or TikTok, through the application of European legal norms.”
Ukrainian MP calling for dialogue with Russia jailed

RT | November 17, 2024
A court in Kiev has placed Ukrainian MP Evgeny Shevchenko in custody for two months after the authorities charged him with treason. Earlier this month, he urged Vladimir Zelensky to engage in dialogue with Russia.
Following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict, Kiev outlawed a number of opposition parties, including Opposition Platform – For Life, the second biggest party in terms of seats in parliament. The authorities cited the opposition’s presumed involvement in subversive activities.
Several individual MPs have similarly been prosecuted.
On Friday, the judge in Shevchenko’s case ruled that the lawmaker would remain behind bars until January 11, 2025. The day before, the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) charged him with treason, accusing him of “systematically” spreading pro-Russian narratives in his speeches and online content. The authorities cited Shevchenko’s publications on Telegram and YouTube, describing them as “harming Ukraine’s defense capabilities and information security.”
The prosecutor also noted that since late 2020, the lawmaker traveled dozens of times to neighboring Belarus and met with President Alexander Lukashenko. Kiev does not recognize Lukashenko as the legitimate leader of the country, which is a key ally of Russia.
One visit in April 2021 resulted in Shevchenko being expelled from the ruling Servant of the People parliamentary faction.
Speaking to reporters on Friday, Shevchenko suggested that he was being targeted for political reasons. His defense lawyers called the case a hastily prepared concoction of materials.
In a post on Telegram last Thursday, Shevchenko called on Zelensky to “begin dialogue” with Russia. “I understand that you will have to go after that. But the country is more important than personal ambitions,” the lawmakers wrote.
He also offered to travel to Belarus and help mediate the process. The MP warned the Ukrainian leader that if he refuses to negotiate, “you will be forced to go… by those who applauded you yesterday in Western countries.”
Commenting on the suggestion, Andrey Yermak, the head of the Office of the President of Ukraine, said that some lawmakers “seem to be confused about issues of national security, national interests, and the future of the country.”
Shevchenko responded by urging Yermak to stop “eliminating” dissenting lawmakers, as “this won’t do Ukraine any good.” In a separate post on Telegram, he called for an end to the “political persecution” of these MPs.
“I wrote a letter to [US President-elect] Donald Trump and [VP-elect] J.D. Vance asking for assistance in putting an end to further authoritarianism, dictatorship, and lawlessness” in Ukraine, he added.
Elon Musk’s X Sues California Over Deepfake Law Seen as Threat to Free Speech
By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | November 16, 2024
Elon Musk’s X has initiated legal action against the state of California, seeking to prevent the enforcement of a new statute mandating that major online platforms either remove or label deepfake election-related content, as a violation of the First Amendment, particularly for its impact on memes and satire.
We obtained a copy of the lawsuit for you here.
The legal challenge was presented in a federal court earlier this week, focusing on legislation designed to curb the influence of artificially altered videos, images, and sounds, collectively known as deepfakes. The legislation is poised to become effective on January 1.
The law in question, Assembly Bill 2655, was signed as part of California’s efforts to safeguard the integrity of the upcoming 2024 US presidential election from the risks posed by technological manipulation. Governor Gavin Newsom, having clashed with Musk following Musk’s sharing of a parody video of Vice President Kamala Harris, aims to mitigate these alleged risks.
The legislation has sparked concerns among tech giants and free speech supporters, who understand that it suppresses user engagement and stifles free discourse and satire under the guise of curbing misinformation.
X’s legal challenge raises critical questions about the boundaries of free speech in the digital age, arguing that the law violates the First Amendment and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects platforms from liability for user-generated content. By requiring platforms like X to preemptively label or remove content, the law, as X contends, “will inevitably result in the censorship of wide swaths of valuable political speech and commentary.”
“AB 2655 requires large online platforms like X, the platform owned by X Corp. (collectively, the ‘covered platforms’), to remove and alter (with a label) — and to create a reporting mechanism to facilitate the removal and alteration of — certain content about candidates for elective office, elections officials, and elected officials, of which the State of California disapproves and deems to be ‘materially deceptive,’” the complaint reads.
The complaint also states that “this system will inevitably result in the censorship of wide swaths of valuable political speech and commentary and will limit the type of ‘uninhibited, robust, and wide-open’ ‘debate on public issues’ that core First Amendment protections are designed to ensure.”
It goes on to say, “AB 2655 imposes a prior restraint on speech because it provides, pursuant to Sections 20515(b) and 20516, expedited causes of action under Section 35 of the California Code of Civil Procedure through which political speech can be enjoined before there occurs a ‘final judicial determination’ that the ‘speech is unprotected.’”
Finally, it states, “AB 2655 violates the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 2, of the California Constitution, both facially and as-applied to X Corp. AB 2655 imposes a prior restraint on speech that forces platforms to censor only certain election-related content of which the State of California disapproves and also directly and impermissibly interferes with the constitutionally protected content-moderation speech rights of covered social media platforms, like X.”
The implications for satire are particularly severe, as highlighted by the case of the parody Harris videos. Although Governor Newsom’s office insists that AB 2655, also known as the Defending Democracy from Deepfake Deception Act of 2024, says it exempts parody and satire, the practical application of this exemption is murky at best since it was a parody video that was the impetus for Governor Newsom to push for the introduction of the law.
Pro-Palestine organization enraged by Canadian police raid against activist
Al Mayadeen | November 16, 2024
The Canada Palestine Association strongly condemned the excessive police brutality the Vancouver police exhibited against local pro-Palestine activist Charlotte Kates, a director of the Samidoun Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity Network.
The Samidoun network was recently blacklisted as a terrorist organization in Canada and the United States. Kates was also previously detained and charged with “hate speech” offenses in May.
The condition for her release was for her not to take part in any “protests, rallies or assemblies” until her court date of October 8, which was triggered by her stance of supporting the right of Palestinians to resist “Israel” and for saying “Long Live October 7” during a rally speech on April 26, the statement wrote.
However, Kates was arrested again on November 14 under claims of a “hate crime investigation” launched by the Vancouver police force, after a search warrant was issued for her home in Victoria Drive.
Kates’ neighbor expressed the neighborhood’s fear as police officers, who arrived at the location in an armored vehicle and full tactical gear, raided her home and broke a window at 9 am on Thursday.
“I’ve lived next to them for three years, and they’re absolutely lovely people. They’re just fighting for rights for people… I don’t think they’re dangerous or terrorists by any means,” another neighbor said.

