Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

NYPD Commissioner Jessica Tisch is Turning New York City into a Surveillance Colony

By Matt Wolfson | The Libertarian Institute | October 29, 2025

In a recent report for the Libertarian Institute, I investigated Zionists’ role in creating the crisis point at which New York City now finds itself: caught between a colonial elite which has commandeered government and a progressive-socialist backlash to that elite which proposes to expand government. In this report, I will trace how, in response to the progressive-socialist threat to their power, Zionists and their allies are expanding government in new and frightening directions. The leading player in this operation, like in all good intelligence ops, is not a colorful or charismatic character. But she has all of the subtler qualities—connections, management prowess, presentational understatement—that the city’s minders look for in those who hold actual power.

Jessica Tisch, the New York Police Department Commissioner since 2024 who will definitely stay on if either Zohran Mamdani or Andrew Cuomo wins the mayoralty according to public statements made by both men, is the third generation of the billionaire Zionist family that has had prominent roles in shaping the city since the 1980s. Her grandfather, Laurence Tisch, bought CBS in the 1980s not long before his brother Robert bought the New York Giants, establishing the family, which had started in hotels and movie theaters, as the owner of two of the city’s landmark organizations. In the 1990s, Laurence Tisch was a member of The Study Group, the informal philanthropic Zionist gathering co-founded by Leslie Wexner and Charles Bronfman, which led directly and indirectly to the foundation of Taglit Birthright, the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, and various other projects for Zionist continuity. Laurence’s son and Jessica’s father, James Tisch, is the chairman of the Board of Leows Corporation, the family’s flagship business. James’ wife and Jessica’s mother, Merryl, was the chancellor of the New York State Board of Regents, responsible for supervising all educational activities in the state; and is the chair of the State University of New York Board of Trustees, responsible for supervising the state university system.

Within this context of a family involved in media, finance, philanthropy, and part-time politics, Jessica Tisch, who is now 44, charted her own specific path: from security to administration to the cusp of politics with the backing of money. She started in the NYPD in the decade of the September 11 attacks; continued in the department in the 2010s; moved in the first half of the 2020s to the Sanitation Department, arguably New York’s most important after police and fire. She has returned in the mid-2020s to the NYPD as its commissioner, while also widely being considered a potential future mayor. Like Mamdani, Tisch is a product, this time a direct one, of the decades of Zionist influence that preceded her rise. Like Mamdani, rewinding Tisch’s career shows how she is the capstone to a project of military policing that began in the 1990s and 2000s but that has sharpened under pressure into a full-blown project of social control.

That project began when crime rose in New York in the 1980s and 1990s in response to displacement and homelessness facilitated by WASPs, Zionists, and their allies co-opting city government to the benefit of finance and real estate. In response, Eric Breindel, the neoconservative Zionist editor of the New York Post who had extensive connections to Wall Street, arranged for the Post to back the then-longshot Rudolph W. Guiliani as a tough-on-crime candidate, delivering him Staten Island and so the city.

At the same time, Michael Steinhardt, the Zionist financier who was integral in the reinvention of Wall Street in the 1980s, became the major donor for the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), which in turn was the major backer of President Bill Clinton, who shepherded to passage in Congress as his main legislative priority the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act. This act provided newly elected Mayor Giuliani and his police commissioner William Bratton federal funds for law enforcement, with certain conditions attached that increased local spending on policing as well as the size of the NYPD. The NYPD’s budget increased from $1.7 billion to $3.1 billion between 1993 and 2000, also leading to increased city spending, since, under the terms of the Clinton crime legislation, to receive federal funds the city had to spend funds of its own.

During this period, “crime”—defined as everything from murder to unlicensed street vending—fell in response to across-the-board enforcement. After 2001, Raymond Kelly, Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s police commissioner, pushed this practice to its limit with the aggressive practice of “stop and frisk” in minority neighborhoods: a daily distillation of the broader disenfranchisement the black and Latino communities of New York had been experiencing since the 1970s.

Kelly also made sure that the NYPD would benefit from post-9/11 funding of counter-terrorism measures, measures which hinged heavily on techniques for surveillance. And it was by channeling this new priority for social control that Jessica Tisch made her career beginning in 2000s. Fresh out of Harvard, she took “an analyst position available in what was then the counterterrorism bureau” of the NYPD. According to a recent profile in The New York Times:

“Kelly…did not normally meet with applicants for such entry-level jobs, but he ended up interviewing her. ‘Probably because she was a Tisch,’ he said, adding that he had been impressed with her three Harvard degrees.”

“Probably because she was a Tisch” seems like a fair assessment of why the supervisor of 55,000 employees took the time to meet a twenty-something about an entry-level position. But Kelly and Tisch also shared the promising ground of a professional focus: Kelly was committed to surveillance-as-policing, and Tisch’s main interest was data and surveillance. At the NYPD, she began “developing the Domain Awareness System, one of the world’s largest networks of security cameras, including handling contracts to build and expand it.” According to a description of this work in a recent profile of Tisch in New York Magazine, she was Domain’s driving force and Domain her career-maker:

“… Tisch, 27, was tasked with figuring out what to do with more than $100 million in unspent grant money from the federal Department of Homeland Security, which had just built a surveillance network to prevent another terror attack downtown. What if, she asked, the Domain Awareness System went citywide? And what if, instead of trying to stop a suicide bomber, the system tried to spot all kinds of crooks? What if it included the NYPD’s trove of arrest reports and criminal histories? When Tisch sent the privacy guidelines for the system to the lawyers at the New York Civil Liberties Union, they retched…The bosses had the opposite reaction: ‘No, you’ve made it. Congratulations,’ the former colleague recalls them saying.”

Based on an initial grant of $350 million from the Department of Homeland Security and developed with Microsoft technology, the System consists today of “a surveillance network of more than 18,000 interconnected cameras—including those in the private sector—as well as law-enforcement databases.” The system, in one description, “assimilates data from several surveillance tools—license plate readers, closed-circuit television streams, facial recognition software and phone call histories—and uses it to identify people.” As these descriptions suggest, private corporations and nonprofits, for example Rockefeller University in Midtown East Manhattan, can buy in: providing their own cameras then linking them to the surveillance system run out of the NYPD. “And,” according to one report, “when Microsoft turns around and sells the technology to other cities, New York gets a cut.”

Tisch was not only one of the developers, if not the developer, of the system; she also so impressed Kelly with her tenacity dealing with the various technology sub-vendors put in play by the project that he moved her up through the ranks. (She also may have impressed Kelly with her access to funds; the nonprofit the New York Police Foundation, which her uncle chaired and where two of her family members still sit on the board, provided some of the early contributions for testing her surveillance system.) Within a decade, “she became the city’s first information technology commissioner… and within months she was in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic, struggling to create a contact tracing system and then a vaccine distribution system.” Throughout this time, Tisch was working with at least one like-minded colleague from a similar background. This was fellow Harvard graduate Rebecca Ulam Weiner, the granddaughter of the Zionist nuclear scientist Stanislav Ulam of the Manhattan Project, whose view of her grandfather’s work is instructive:

“As someone whose job it is to keep secrets, I often wonder whether such an experiment [as the Manhattan Project] would be possible today, scientifically or socially.”

Fast forward to November 2024, and an embattled Mayor Eric Adams, whose allies in the black community have increasingly moved away from him even as powerful Zionists have edged closer, appointed Tisch Commissioner. He did this despite vocal concerns from civil liberties advocates that, in the words of one, “It’s really alarming to see a commissioner who built her career on the infrastructure of mass surveillance.” Weiner is Tisch’s deputy commissioner of intelligence and counterterrorism, and has let it be known that her department “relies on a mind-boggling suite of assets that Americans might otherwise assume are controlled by the CIA, FBI, DHS, Secret Service, or other agencies.” These include:

“… a legion of intelligence analysts, counterassault and dignitary-protection teams, a flotilla of boats…surveillance aircraft, the nation’s biggest bomb squad, a counter-drone unit, a remote contingent of NYPD detectives… and a network of multilingual undercover operatives…”

Among this “remote contingent” is NYPD Detective Charlie Benaim, “[whose] office could be any squad room in Brooklyn, but for years [has been] an Israeli police station near Tel Aviv,” where “Benaim’s been feeding an endless stream of information, in real time, to his bosses back at One Police Plaza.” According to Weiner, Benaim’s function is “asking the New York question, when something is happening, what would it look like it if it were to happen in New York City, and more importantly than that, how do you prevent it?” A new model for Benaim in answering these questions, apparently, is the Hamas uprising of October 7. This suggests either that the NYPD expects a coordinated attack from foreign operators; or that New York’s security leaders see the city as potentially under siege by its own displaced and ghettoized underclass and plan to respond accordingly.

Telling in this regard is the fact that Tisch’s top priority as commissioner is “doubling down on data-driven policing and surveillance,” an aim which has “sparked fierce criticism from watchdog groups that New Yorkers are living in a surveillance state.” According to New York Magazine, Tisch’s proposed reforms fall along four lines. First, she wants to expand actual surveillance capacities by expanding the city’s camera network “to include more privately owned cameras.” Second, she wants to extend the contract of one of Domain’s less reliable components, “the ShotSpotter gunshot-detection system” which “may result in confirmed shootings only less than 15 percent of the time, according to the comptroller’s office,” a fact which Tisch dismisses, “arguing that something is better than nothing.” Third, she wants to use data collected “to surge police resources down to a single block,” allowing for the department to deploy overwhelming force to tackle individual incidents in small areas. (This means essentially treating city policing as counterinsurgency warfare, and it’s not too different than the LAPD tactics that led to the abuse of Rodney King and the fallout that followed.) Finally, “perhaps the biggest change is that she wants to use those same systems and processes to fight ‘chaos,’ not just crime,” meaning that minor noise disturbances or unusual behavior could qualify for police enforcement via surveillance and surges. (Again, this is a retread of the 1990s: “Giuliani-style crackdowns, only with better gear.”)

More instructively still, she feels this way despite at least one recent controversy suggesting that her policies have adverse effects on the very communities historically at the blunt end of militarized policing. According to The New York Times, in an August report, the NYPD used Domain Awareness System’s facial recognition software to identify and arrest for indecent exposure in April a 230 pound 6-foot-2 black man, Trevis Williams. The arrest was made even though a witness said that the offender was about 160 pounds and 5-foot-6 and even though “location data from [Williams’s] phone put him about 12 miles away at the time.” According to the Times, the fact that “a facial recognition program plucked his image from an array of mug shots and the woman identified him as the flasher was enough to land Williams in jail.” This is despite the fact that “other police departments… require investigators to gather more facts before putting a suspect identified by facial recognition into a photo lineup,” and despite advocacy from groups like the American Civil Liberties Union to “ban… the use of facial recognition by the police because of the risk of misidentification.”

“In the blink of an eye, your whole life could change,” Williams told the Times about his experience, adding that he still gets panic attacks since his April arrest and subsequent imprisonment. The Times investigation did not report asking for a comment from the NYPD or its Commissioner. Nor did it report that, as early as 2019, 11,000 cases per year were being investigated by the NYPD with the help of facial recognition software.

Despite collateral damage from her policies, positive media profiles of “Commish Tisch” and her subordinates have been plentiful since her accession. In an April 2025 report in The News section of The New York Times, the paper had the following to say about her: She has “an unlikely and remarkable career”; is “the daughter and granddaughter of two strong women, neither of whom came from money”; “learned hard work by example”; is “talkative and purposeful, but circumspect”; is a “no-nonsense technocrat” and “incredibly competent”; commands “a huge amount of respect”; is “very businesslike,” “[takes] no guff,” and should run for mayor. New York Magazine, the city’s go-to venue for fashion and culture commentary, had run an equally complimentary profile in March of 2025 that included the same political prediction.

And, the month before New York Magazine’s profile of Tisch, Vanity Fair ran a profile of Tisch’s deputy Weiner titled “NYPD Confidential.” Headed by a black-and-white photo of Weiner flanked by members of her squad that seemed ripped from a promotional poster of Captain America, the article’s text gave its subject an equally marquee treatment, describing her as “laser focused,” “unfazed,” “poised, cultivated, pin-sharp, convivial, boundlessly curious, charmingly profane,” and “a lightning-quick study” who had “a wicked sense of humor.” All three of these profiles also emphasized, as The New York Times’ editorial board regularly emphasizes, a recent rise in crime in the city without honing in on its obvious causes: financialization, gentrification, and displacement.

The Times is owned by the Sulzberger Family, whose members are ambivalent about Zionism but who have deep connections to Zionists. (Their executive editor, Joseph Kahn, is the son of a committed Zionist corporatist and runs in the billionaire Zionist milieu; their editorial page is dominated by Jewish Zionists of all political persuasions; and the former head of the Sulzberger family wealth office now heads Bill Ackman’s.) Vanity Fair is still owned by the Newhouse Family, which, as I reported in my recent investigation on the rise of Zionist power in New York, was vital to that project thanks to its ownership of Conde Nast. New York Magazine is dependent for its scoops on access to the city’s financial and philanthropic elite, many of them Zionists—its recent profile subjects include not just Jessica Tisch but Barry Diller and Diane Von Furstenberg and Bill Ackman. The message from these media venues seems clear: the Zionist financial powers of New York are squarely behind Jessica Tisch, and want their readers to know it.

It is not, in this context, a coincidence that the Times ran an article soon after Zohran Mamdani’s victory in the Democratic mayoral primary citing anonymous sources to report that Mamdani was being urged to keep Tisch on if he wins the mayoralty as a “steady pair of hands.” It is also not a coincidence that this story came during a period when Dan Loeb and Bill Ackman, younger Zionist financial-philanthropic operators, were attacking Mamdani as soft-on-crime almost daily and shifting their funding focus to Mamdani’s Independent mayoral competitor, Mayor Eric Adams, to the point of personally vetting Adams’s campaign manager before the position was filled. What this suggested at the time was a pincer movement, in which attacks by Loeb and Ackman pressured Mamdani into keeping Tisch on as a sign of faith in the establishment and détente with Zionism.

And, in late October, with Mamdani still attacked by connected Zionist players for purportedly making Jews feel unsafe despite the fact that he has attracted significant Jewish support, this is exactly what occurred. On October 22, Mamdani announced, four days after Andrew Cuomo had announced the same, that he would ask Tisch to stay on should he win the election. The reported terms on which this “ask” was made are not encouraging when it comes to Mamdani’s leverage over Tisch if he is elected mayor. Details in The New York Times painted a scenario in which Mamdani had publicly (and factually erroneously) made Tisch the poster child for safety in the city without extracting any concessions from her camp in return. According to the Times,

“… Mr. Mamdani confirmed his decision during the final televised debate before the Nov. 4 election. ‘Commissioner Tisch took on a broken status quo, started to deliver accountability, rooting out corruption and reducing crime across the five boroughs,’ Mr. Mamdani said at the debate. “I’ve said time and again that my litmus test for that position will be excellence’… Ms. Tisch’s allies have signaled for months that she would want to stay in the job regardless of the election’s outcome. [Mamdani] campaign officials declined to detail any conversations between the candidate and the commissioner, but said they were confident she would accept. Delaney Kempner, a spokeswoman for Ms. Tisch, referred a reporter back to an earlier statement from the commissioner stressing that ‘it is not appropriate for the police commissioner to be directly involved or to seem to be involved in electoral politics.’”

Tisch’s strategic mix of aggressive behind-the-scenes lobbying and Olympian public detachment sends a message: as New York Magazine put it less than twenty-four hours after Mamdani made the announcement, she is “the Heiress Who Could Make or Break the Socialist Mayor.” Not long after this article ran, Hakeem Jeffries, the New York Democratic leader of the U.S. House of Representatives, ended five months of ostentatious non-endorsement of Mamdani with a statement endorsing Mamdani—specifically praising his willingness to keep on Tisch. Already, then, thanks to a series of private maneuvers and public feints, Tisch has been placed in the driver’s seat: the establishment’s cooperation with Mamdani is clearly conditioned on Mamdani’s continued acceptance of her.

One difficulty of critiquing moves like these is that the conflation of “Jewish power” and New York is an old trope, in part because New York has been since the early twentieth century a Jewish city. So it should be emphasized, as I have emphasized in my previous report on this topic, that New York’s problem is not a problem of Jewish power. It is a problem of government-tied financialization at the hands of a small number of WASPs and then a small number of Zionists, and it has come at the expense of the people who live in the city, among them many Jews. Now, with a direct threat to Zionists’ influence in the person of Zohran Mamdani, the operation is out front. Zionist financiers have sent one of their own to occupy the most powerful security position in the city, and they are intent on keeping her there. If they fail to install their ally Andrew Cuomo in the mayoralty, which will give Tisch carte blanche, the prospect of them working to sabotage a Mamdani mayoralty in the lead-up to a Tisch For Mayor campaign in 2029 is a very real one.

They will likely do this much like they managed the securance of Jessica Tisch’s job: with media attacks meant to maximize pressure on Mamdani; followed by private assurances to Mamdani that the attacks will stop if concessions follow. These public-private feints, in turn, will push Mamdani into concessions which will make him lose face with his base, isolating him between an unfriendly establishment and a disillusioned electorate. (This trend is already occurring, albeit at the edges, after Mamdani’s public commitment to keeping Tisch, whom many Mamdani voters see as a threat to civil liberties.) Tisch’s allies will manage these plays with the help of The New York Times and other organs of influence (the Conde Nast publications, New York Magazine, the New York Post) which by their own admission are pining for technocratic government predicated on what they call “effective management.”

But there is another equally bad outcome that could accrue should Mamdani win the mayoralty and Tisch stay on as police commissioner. This is the fusion of the most dangerous potential aspect of socialism, total government direction of the economy, with the most dangerous potential aspect of Zionism: total techno-military colonial control. It doesn’t take a great deal of imagination to see how, under a de facto power-sharing agreement between Mamdani and Tisch (Mamdani in charge of domestic welfare, Tisch in charge of security) the worst impulses of both systems will merge to create a city government which is totalistically involved in every aspect of its citizens’ lives, Singapore transfused with Sweden. This outcome for a city which for a century has been read as a triumph of American individualism would be, to understate the case, a seismic shift.

October 30, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , , , | Leave a comment

A New Low: Western Media Promotes ISIS-Linked Gangsters In Gaza

By Robert Inlakesh | Palestine Chronicle | October 29, 2025

Al-Natour is the embodiment of the archetypal Palestinian collaborator. A man who portrays himself as a victim uses his own experience as a Palestinian to whitewash Israeli genocide.

On October 27, the Washington Post published an article entitled “The ceasefire created two Gazas. One will consume the other.” The author argues that “My Gaza is ready for peace” and that “Hamas is trying to destroy it”, promoting the fictitious Israeli narrative that a utopian Gaza is being made possible inside the portion of the enclave where the occupation forces remain, behind the so-called “Yellow Line”.

The article works to promote the Israeli scheme in Gaza, which has been openly endorsed by US officials, and argues in favor of only allowing reconstruction in the territory operated by Israel, alongside four primary ISIS-linked militias.

Evidently, the article makes no mention of the Israeli armed and controlled Palestinian death squads – composed of convicted drug traffickers, rapists, murderers, ISIS-linked Salafists and aid looters.

The piece is purportedly written by one Moumen al-Natour, which makes even more sense out of why there is no mention of the ISIS-linked death squads, because he himself is an armed member of one such death squad.

Al-Natour is the embodiment of the archetypal Palestinian collaborator. A man who portrays himself as a victim uses his own experience as a Palestinian to whitewash Israeli genocide and lies about every detail to turn himself into a “peace activist” opposed to armed resistance, while simultaneously partaking in activities designed to further the extermination of his own people.

Take, for example, the following excerpt from the ISIS-linked death squad collaborator’s alleged opinion piece:

“My Gaza, where I wish to live, exists between Israel and the yellow line. There, the war is over and change buzzes in the air. People have access to food, medicine and electricity. And other signs of normality are beginning to return, such as some children going back to school. This is the Gaza that is waiting with anticipation to work with a new civil administration and an international protection force that will keep the peace as Israel withdraws. Few there speak of Hamas with any warmth or positivity. For once they no longer have to.”

The territory spoken of here is the area of Gaza where Israel and four ISIS-linked collaborator gangs operate; the only civilians there are the families of the death squads. Any other Palestinians attempting to reach their homes inside this area are bombed or gunned down by Israeli forces.

This territory, on the other side of Israel’s “Yellow Line,” is supposed to be 53% of Gaza, yet in reality is anywhere between 54-58% of the territory, due to Israel violating the ceasefire agreement and operating deeper than agreed upon inside the supposed withdrawal zone.

In addition to this, Israel continues its daily demolition operations against the remaining Palestinian civilian infrastructure inside the territory, again in violation of the ceasefire agreement. The proof of this has been openly published by Israeli soldiers who post videos of their demolition work on social media.

As for access to food, medicine, and electricity, these are provided to the collaborator gangs by Israel and are something they have not lacked during the war. While the people of Gaza were being starved for three months straight earlier this year, al-Natour’s militia friends were living lives of relative luxury.

Not only were al-Natour’s collaborator gang not starved, the so-called “Popular Forces” that he is part of, led by ISIS-linked convicted drug trafficker Yasser Abu Shabab, were living off of the supplies they stole from humanitarian aid trucks and looted from Gaza’s civilian population.

That is what these militant organizations began receiving Israeli backing to do – before being repurposed, armed and given direct combat missions by the IDF and Shin Bet – to rob humanitarian aid trucks and help enforce Israel’s starvation policy in Gaza. All of these collaborator gangs were tasked with involvement in such activities, and many of their militants continue to loot.

Meanwhile, in the Western corporate media and its allied Arab publications, al-Natour and his ilk are portrayed as the peace activists opposed to Hamas tyranny. For al-Natour’s part, he was one of the founders of the “We Want To Live” movement, which claimed its mission was to improve living conditions inside the besieged coastal enclave, described by UN experts as “unlivable” back in 2020.

As an activist, he was accused of working on behalf of Israel and spreading a message critical of Hamas, leading to his arrest. Whether he was a collaborator back then is under dispute, yet, during the genocide, he and his anti-Hamas message were picked up by a media outlet called Jasoor News.

This media outlet’s editor-in-chief is a Washington based journalist, named Hadeel Oueis, who routinely shares anti-Hamas content, including from the Center for Peace Communications (CPC). Oueis also expresses support for the current Syrian leadership of Ahmed al-Shara’a.

The CPC has received considerable donations from the Adelson Family Foundation of Israel’s richest billionaire and top Trump campaign donor, Miriam Adelson. For Jasoor News’ part, it is explicitly anti-Hamas, anti-Hezbollah, anti-Ansarallah, while publishing pieces in favor of the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia.

Western Media Support For ISIS-linked Groups

The recent propaganda opinion piece published by the Washington Post comes as little surprise, as it was the first Western publication to publish an interview with ISIS-linked militia leader Yasser Abu Shabab in November of 2024, when Israel began to give the aid looting gang a facelift and begin promoting them as a “grassroots” anti-Hamas resistance force.

In that WP piece, Abu Shabab claims victim status and that he looted aid out of necessity, expressing that “Hamas has left us with nothing”, despite his gang of collaborators clearly being the only group of Gazans who actually did have something during the genocide. Abu Shabab was used to do Israel’s bidding, blocking the flow of aid to civilians and lived under the protection of the Israeli military while doing so.

Back in July, the Wall Street Journal then published an opinion piece entitled “Gazans are finished with Hamas”, which it claimed was written by Yasser Abu Shabab himself. This was despite the fact that local sources in Gaza attest to Abu Shabab not only being unable to write in English, but also being illiterate and incapable of writing such a piece in Arabic too.

According to anonymous sources belonging to Palestinian journalist Muhammad Shehada, the latest Washington Post piece was published as explicit Israeli propaganda. “Journalists told me a pro-Israeli PR firm in DC is the one that pushed for this propaganda article to be published,” he wrote on X [formerly Twitter], adding that “my sources said there’s a chance the firm is the one that even wrote the op-ed”.

All of this works as part of an Israeli propaganda campaign aimed at legitimizing the agenda to create two separate systems of rule in Gaza, through spreading lies about Hamas and egregiously exaggerating the brutality of its Security Force crackdown on collaborators.

Israel is currently violating the Gaza ceasefire, not only through its daily bombings and sniping of civilians, but also through its refusal to allow sufficient aid to reach the civilian population. The Israelis had committed to allowing 400 aid trucks into Gaza for the first five days of the ceasefire before an unlimited amount afterward, later committing to permit 600 a day to enter, yet have allowed in a daily average of less than 90.

The idea, endorsed by the United States, is to deploy an international invasion force in the Gaza Strip, which will work alongside the ISIS-linked death squads to disarm Hamas. Once the Israelis withhold construction materials and equipment from entering the populated areas of the territory, where Hamas remains in power, they will then offer the civilian population a choice between entering their version of Gaza under occupation, or remaining where they are to starve and rot.

Hamas, along with all the other Palestinian factions, has agreed to hand Gaza over to an interim administration of technocratic governance, but will not disarm until the creation of a Palestinian State. Israel will not allow for this and instead uses its collaborators to fight for its own agenda, depending on its propaganda that is being prominently spread by its Palestinian media allies as a means of justifying this approach.

Inside Gaza, these ISIS-linked gangsters have no popular support. In fact, the vast preponderance of the population supports the Security Forces campaign to stamp out these groups. Despite the propagandists and militia members claiming that they are fighting a tyrannical regime that is killing its own people, the population of Gaza do not believe this narrative and hence will not support such a scheme.

The current round of propaganda against Hamas mirrors the regime change rhetoric used to overthrow countless governments in the region, beginning with Iraq. For example, during the campaign to justify the overthrow of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, Western governments and Washington-based think-tanks paid Iraqi “experts” and “peace activists” to justify the invasion of their own country.

Every time, the regime change script is the same. Except in this case, it is unlikely to succeed due to the grievances of Gazans with Hamas not matching those of their regional neighbors. This, however, will not stop the constant chorus of lies, exaggerations, and distortions from Washington and Tel Aviv’s “peace activists” who turn out to be armed members of ISIS-linked gangs and “Palestinian analysts” who just so happen to work for Zionist think-tanks.

These individuals speak with the language of “peace”, “reconciliation,” and “forgiving Israel”, but are ultimately soulless propagandists who weaponize their identity to serve an agenda aimed at destroying their own people. They value nothing more than status, power, and financial gain.

In the pro-genocide Western corporate media, these voices will continue to be elevated and their claims will never be fact-checked, because these outlets function as stenographers for the US and Israeli governments.

October 29, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment

Leaked: Britain’s Ukrainian sniper training plot

By Kit Klarenberg | Al Mayadeen | October 29, 2025

Since the Ukraine proxy war’s eruption, a shadowy cabal of British academics has secretly advised the US National Security Council on escalatory strategies. Many of their recommendations – some inspired by ISIS – have been adopted by Washington. It’s uncertain whether one of the boldest proposals – to train Ukrainian snipers on American soil – was one way or another greenlit. More gravely, this effort was intended to set a trap for the Biden administration, luring the US into deeper involvement in the conflict.

A leaked document, authored in April 2022 by St. Andrews University lecturer and the British cabal’s chief NSC contact Marc DeVore, sets out a bold vision for Washington’s “non-profit associations, civil society and private sector businesses” to tutor Ukrainian sharpshooters. US citizens were reputed to possess “the wherewithal and… motivation to provide such training,” while DeVore judged Donbass’ “slow-moving” battlefield – with its emphasis on “urban combat” – to be “an environment ideal for snipers.”

DeVore believed neither Ukraine nor Russia were “well-provided with snipers”, due to their common military “Soviet heritage”. By contrast, the US was “ideally placed to help Ukraine fill this ‘sniper gap’”, due to the country’s “surfeit of snipers, including US Army and Marine Corps veterans with experience in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the police snipers belonging to large numbers of SWAT teams.” Moreover, DeVore venerated “high standards of civilian marksmanship” in the US, due to “large” national networks of “rifle ranges and shooting clubs.”

The ability to purchase “the world’s most competitive sniper rifles” legally Stateside was an added bonus. Nonetheless, the true icing on the cake, per DeVore, was triangulating the Biden administration into formally endorsing Western arming and training of Ukrainian forces. The academic bemoaned how to date, Washington had been “timid” in offering direct assistance to Kiev, such as avoiding “overtly providing heavy weaponry”, due to “excessive fears of Russian retaliation/escalation,” and a “desire to maintain…deniability” in delivering such assistance.

As such, DeVore believed the sniper training program would offer war-ravenous Republicans the opportunity to “pressure and shame the [US] government into more overtly training Ukrainian forces,” and “openly [criticise] the President for not using the government’s resources to do so.” The academic predicted Biden would “respond to this criticism by publicly revealing more of the US government’s training activities.” That, combined with “Russia’s likely non-response”, would “open the door for the US to further increase the training and equipment it is providing,” DeVore fantasised.

“However, the Biden Administration [responds] to the private-sector training would hand hawkish Republicans a victory,” he forecast. A US-based Ukrainian sniper training program “would also give Republican politicians valuable talking points” for attacking the President. Were the White House to resultantly increase open support for Kiev, “then Republicans could claim credit for forcing him to do so.” If Biden alternatively “sought to circumscribe the training,” gun rights organisations and opposition governors could “wage a popular legal battle against the federal government” to force its reinstatement.

Both would “stand to benefit substantially from the positive public relations” generated both by overseeing the sniper training program, and the ensuing opportunity to “embarrass the Biden administration much more” over its supposedly lackluster backing for the proxy conflict. Still, the ultimate goal was to ensure “much more widespread training of Ukrainian military personnel in the West.” US acquiescence was “necessary for NATO to be able to enhance Ukrainian military capabilities to such a level that Ukraine can bring this war to an acceptable conclusion.”

DeVore drew inspiration for the project from the Yugoslav wars of the 1990s, when US military magazine Soldier Of Fortune instigated sniper training for Bosniaks and Croats fighting Belgrade’s forces. The outlet, read by wannabe mercenaries and US army veterans, was founded by Robert K. Brown, a retired Lieutenant Colonel “who felt deeply sympathetic to the Croatians and Bosnians fighting for their independence.” Brown thus bankrolled and encouraged readers “with sniping experience” to travel to the region, “and organize a crash course” for sharpshooters.

Locals who were “pretty good shots” were identified, “and swiftly trained…to a standard where they contributed powerfully” to their wars against the Yugoslav army. Moreover, pupils “wrote articles on their activities for Soldier of Fortune, selling magazines and raising awareness” of their independence struggles. DeVore sought to repeat the success of this “non-governmental” training on a “larger scale”.  He envisaged enlisting “firearms related non-profits and businesses… to contribute to bringing this about.”

DeVore believed “ideally”, a “major national gun rights” organisation in the US, such as the National Rifle Association “or one of its rivals” would “play a coordinating role.” He foresaw “rifle ranges [being] asked to donate range time, ammunition makers to contribute bullets, and individuals with relevant marksmanship or sniper experience to volunteer their skills.” Pro-proxy war state governors “could also publicly embrace the movement by allowing state forests and National Guard facilities to be used for training”:

“Launching a civil society sniper training program in the [US] could therefore benefit from ideal circumstances, including; a networking of long range ranges where marksmen can be trained; highly skilled snipers and firearms instructors capable of teaching Ukrainians both the fieldcraft and weapons skills they need, and; a significant Ukrainian diaspora in the USA and Canada who could provide volunteers for training.”

DeVore went on to declare that “a large number” Ukrainians living abroad “who want to fight” in the proxy war were “being held back by their [lack] of experience,” suggesting “offering specialist training to… volunteers” among Kiev’s diaspora. Once taught, they would “return home with valuable skills, materially aiding Ukraine’s cause.” More generally, “if friendly governments and civilians help by training critical specialists, it will speed up the process of forming new units and make those that are formed significantly more effective.”

DeVore believed the training should “take place in a two stage process.” First, students would be taught “marksmanship”, during which they fired “thousands of rounds of ammunition to develop the necessary accuracy, rifle maintenance and range estimation skills” at rifle ranges across the US. “The infrastructure and teaching skills needed for this variety of training are fairly common,” he wrote, adding, “the dispersed nature of the training would simplify the accommodation of trainees,” with only a “small number” of pupils housed “near each individual range”.

Once trainees achieved “an adequate level of marksmanship,” they would be schooled by former snipers “in the more specialized skills of camouflage, concealment, infiltration, stalking and other forms of tradecraft.” DeVore proposed conducting this phase “in a combination of forested lands and simulated urban environments” – “large disused factories such as exist in the upper Midwest would be ideal for this purpose.” Upon completing this cycle, “snipers will be transported to Ukraine, where they can put their new-found skills to use.”

DeVore suggested “positive publicity” from being associated with the program “would be a major inducement for guns rights groups” due to “Financial corruption scandals and the need to defend permissive firearms laws in the wake of mass shootings,” which have “tarnished the image” of these organisations at home and abroad. “Training volunteer snipers for a popular war would provide a public relations bonanza for the organization that spearheads the effort,” the academic mused.

If training for Ukrainian snipers was provided on US soil, it wasn’t conducted in the highly public, politicised manner DeVore advocated. Nonetheless, the mainstream media has acknowledged Kiev’s sharpshooters are dependent on high-end American-made rifles and ammunition, and ongoing shipments of this equipment are no secret. Yet, the profusion of US sniper rifles on the battlefields of Donbass has failed to tilt the frontline in Ukraine’s favour one inch – in the precise manner of so many other British-influenced and concocted proxy war grand schemes.

As this journalist has extensively documented, all Kiev’s gravest military disasters, such as the October 2023 – June 2024 Krynky catastrophe, were planned in London. That effort saw wave after wave of British-trained Ukrainian marines attempt to secure a beachhead in Russian-occupied territory, before marching on Crimea and outright victory in the war. Planning was heavily-informed by a desire to recreate the Normandy landings – D-Day – based on fantastical, Hollywood conceptions of that operation. Coincidentally, so too was DeVore’s sniper training program.

In the leaked document, DeVore suggested his plan would have significant political and public appeal due to “the popularity of fictional resistance narratives, going back to Red Dawn.” In that movie, a gang of American teenage guerrillas successfully beat back an invasion of the US by Soviet forces – a compelling filmic narrative, but hardly a basis for actual war-fighting tactics, one might reasonably think. Such are the dangers of outsourcing battle strategy to academics thousands of miles removed from the frontline, with no military experience.

October 29, 2025 Posted by | Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Militarism | , | Leave a comment

New Hungarian play shows key Orbán ally locked in box and beaten to death

By Liz Heflin | Remix News | October 29, 2025

A new play in Budapest, written and directed by Béla Pintér, shows a character being put in a box and beaten to death.

As graphic and perhaps unappealing as that may be for many theater-goers, there is an even bigger problem with “Kabuki”: Everyone agrees the character is made up to look like Maria Schmidt, a major ally of Hungarian PM Viktor Orbán and director of a few institutions, namely, the 20th Century Institute, the 21st Century Institute, and the House of Terror Museum.

As the opposition-friendly portal 444 wrote: “But then everything gets really rough when the Fidesz oligarch, Schanda (!) Vera, who looks like Mária Schmidt, asks the poet to be their party’s candidate. The man (…) reluctantly admits that he is unable to run, as he finds the way the government party is treating the martyred (Russian opposition leader) Alexei Navalny so outrageous. The woman is completely upset about this, as she doesn’t think Navalny is worth anything and believes that Russia has free elections, unlike the West.”

The portal continues, stating that “the woman annoys him so much” that he “throws her into a large box and beats her to death with a stick.”

One commentary in Mandiner hit home as to the boundaries being crossed “in the name of art.”

“Béla Pintér’s latest play, in which the beating of the director of the House of Terror Museum is played out on stage, is not art: it is at once hate speech, political incitement, and moral corruption. The play doesn’t make you think, it doesn’t invite dialogue – it just hits you. Both literally and figuratively.

“For someone to dramatize the death of a living, public figure and elevate it to a theatrical experience is not a brave gesture, but a tasteless, inhumane provocation,” wrote Katalin Szily, a member of Fidesz’s coalition partner, KDNP.

“Béla Pintér and his company have now abused this responsibility. This is not satire, not social criticism, but cold cynicism and intellectual vandalism. And the viewer, who watches and applauds, unwittingly becomes part of this ritual of hatred,” she continued.

“Where is the line? Where do we draw the line? Tomorrow, maybe they’ll stage the execution of politicians and journalists and applaud?”

Szily also poignantly asks, “Where, oh where, are the voices in the name female solidarity?”

Author Gabor Bokor also wrote: “Béla Pintér is an important figure in the Hungarian theater world, a pioneer of alternative stage plays, with which he has gained many fans.”

“We can think whatever we want about Mária Schmidt’s statements, we can criticize her in a play, this is part of artistic freedom, but I beg you: Kill her?” he asks.

October 29, 2025 Posted by | Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Progressive Hypocrite | | Leave a comment

How Israel-First Jewish Americans plan to re-monopolise the narratives on Palestine

By Jamal Kanj | MEMO | October 27, 2025

The nature of the United States’ relationship with Israel defies logic and reason. It is a parasitic one-sided benefit, entangled in the tentacles of organised influence, manipulation, financial power, and media control. Israel contributes next to nothing of tangible benefit to America’s security, strategic value, or economy, yet Washington continues to design its foreign policy and moral compass around Israel. It is so absurd it borders on sorcery.

A relationship driven by an Israel-first agenda that extends beyond the halls of Congress into the very architecture of the disinformation system. It reshapes how Americans think and how they view the world: through Congress, through newsrooms, through algorithms, and through paid “influencers,” one at a time. To that end, American media and entertainment industries serve as essential tools for molding the nation’s political landscape and American culture. Oracle’s CEO, Safra Catz, captured this intent candidly in a 2015 email to former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, writing, “We believe that we have to embed the love and respect for Israel in the American culture.”

A decade later, that vision is maturing. Israel-first Oracle founder Larry Ellison is now poised  to acquire major show business studios and news outlets. His son, David Ellison, has become the head of Paramount and CBS through the Skydance–Paramount merger. This is while Ellison senior is in talks to purchase Warner Bros., its film studios, and CNN.

As a major media owner and influential figure in political campaigns, Ellison has a well-documented history of coordinating with Israeli government officials. Evidence of this surfaced recently in hacked emails published by Drop Site News and Responsible Statecraft. In 2015, in an email exchange, Israel’s then–ambassador to the United Nations, Ron Prosor, asked Ellison if Senator Marco Rubio had “passed his scrutiny.” Ellison assured him that Rubio “will be a great friend for Israel,” later donating $5 million for Rubio’s presidential primary campaign. Rubio didn’t pass Ellison’s scrutiny as an American patriot; he passed it for Israel.

Under the ownership of Israel-first billionaires, American media outlets have become revolving doors for “embedded” Zionist shaping public perception. Case in point is Bari Weiss, founder of The Free Press, and the new editor-in-chief of CBS News. Weiss is described as “ardent supporter of Israel” who has used her platform to whitewash the Israeli genocide and starvation campaign in Gaza. She is now bringing those talking points from a fringe outlet straight into one of the nation’s major news organizations.

Ellison and other Israel-first donors like Miriam Adelson, who gave Trump’s campaign $100 million, have one single focus: who is best to represent Israel’s interests in Washington. Even Trump, who brands himself as an “America First” president, admits as much telling the Israeli Knesset that his major donor, Adelson, loves Israel more than America.

In addition to traditional media, social media has become the latest arena for influence by Israel-first power brokers. TikTok stands out as the first major platform not owned or controlled by Israel-first investors. For this reason, Tik Tok was possibly the only major social media outlet that escaped the Israeli managed algorithm. It is no coincidence that Israeli officials, along with Israel-first Jewish American politicians and media pundits, have amplified claims of “data security risks” to justify efforts to either shut TikTok down or take control of its messaging.

Leading the push to acquire TikTok are none other than Israel-first Ellison and Murdoch families. The same Israel-first billionaires whose influence extends across media, technology, and politics. The TikTok debate has little to do with data security and everything to do with Israeli narrative security. The concern was never Chinese access to American data, but rather the inability of the Israel-first actors to manipulate TikTok’s algorithm and content flow. Ironically, even Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu applauded the planned takeover of TikTok, calling it “the most important purchase going on right now.” “Weapons change over time,” he told a group of Israeli “digital warriors.” “The most important ones are on social media.”

The consequences reach far beyond the newsroom. A Responsible Statecraft investigation revealed that Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has been quietly paying American social media influencers up to $7,000 per post to push pro-Israel content without any disclosure. In other words, US information space is being systematically infiltrated by undisclosed foreign propaganda.

What we are witnessing is not just the manufacturing of consent, but a corporate and money colonization of truth. With Ellison’s empire controlling these platforms, Weiss’s like controlling the newsroom, and Israel’s ministries funding the feeds, the American mind is a victim of engineered illusion. This is not a mere media bias. It is institutionalised propaganda disguised as “mainstream journalism.”

Voltaire once wrote, “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” For decades, Israel and its enablers have convinced Americans of the absurd: that religion grants Europeans ancestral rights to the Middle East, a nuclear-armed occupier is a victim, and genocide is “self-defence.”

America’s real test of democracy is not on the battlefields, but in confronting AIPAC and Israel-first influence over our executive and legislative branches, the curated news, and most dangerously, the creeping effort to stifle academic freedom in our universities, sealing the colonisation of the American mind.

The intersection of political influence and media ownership raises concerns not only about the extent of its reach, but in how seamlessly it blends into the cultural and political mainstream, making foreign interests appear as domestic consensus. The merging of political power and Israel-first money has reduced US media to an instrument of ideological conformity. Now with Israel-first Fox News, combined with Ellison’s expanding media empire monopolising the narrative, America will finally have its version of the Israel-Pravda.

October 27, 2025 Posted by | Full Spectrum Dominance, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , | Leave a comment

Western journalists know they have a case to answer for their betrayal of Gaza, and it frightens them

By Samuel Geddes | Al Mayadeen | October 24, 2025

Pulitzer Prize-winning war correspondent and former Middle East Bureau chief for The New York Times, Christopher Hedges, this week delivered the Edward Said memorial lecture in Australia. He had also been invited to address the country’s national “Press Club” in which he was to highlight the overwhelming moral failures of Western establishment media outlets, chiefly by amplifying Israeli propaganda and undermining the credibility of journalists in Gaza, most of whom “Israel” has subsequently killed in its decimation of the territory’s population.

It shouldn’t really have come as a surprise then, when the Press Club rescinded its invitation to Hedges on the grounds of “balancing out” its programming. Whether or not the withdrawal was directly influenced by Israeli pressure, the collective media aristocracy of the country would hardly have looked forward to the prospect of an actual, decorated reporter scathingly indicting them to their faces on their systematic malpractice and dereliction of duty that has contributed to perhaps the definitive atrocity of the 21st century.

Stalwart ABC journalist David Marr came out to defend “The Club” in a radio interview with a furious Chris Hedges. Rather than seek to engage with the content of what his speech would have been, Marr set about using his training as a barrister to ambush the real journalist in the room, smearing the sponsorship of his tour by a Palestine advocacy group as a “fundamental breaking of the rules,” according to his definition of journalism.

Beneath the sniveling pettiness and affected outrage of his attacks on Hedges, lurked a palpable sense of indignation that anyone, least of all a decorated journalist, would attack his “club” of establishment approved media personalities for having not done their job, to the point of betraying those Gazans practicing journalism in its purest form.

Marr, whose career is not particularly distinguished by international reporting, much less from a warzone, attempted to impugn Hedges’ authority on Gaza (where he lived for seven years) by pointing out that he hadn’t been in the territory since 2005 and hence his lack of recent experience there might not have measured up to the Club’s exacting standards.

The substance, to the degree there was any to Marr’s arguments, was that those organizations, Sky News, CNN and Reuters, by privileging Israeli talking points about the victims of their attacks, was merely standard due journalistic diligence of including “Israel’s” “perspective” in the interests of balance.

Hedges immediately and rightfully fired back that the job of a journalist is to tell the truth, not to balance it out with lies. “Israel’s” excuses and misdirection do, of course, merit being referred to, but not in a way that explicitly lends them credibility, by literally headlining the report.

What Marr evidently did not seem to understand was that Hedges is not saying that Western journalists manipulate or distort the truth. It is that they systematically amplify Israeli narratives which they know to be false, in a way that drowns out the truth of the story. This creates a false equivalence between Palestinian and Israeli “narratives.” It is precisely this mixing in of lies with truth that allowed “Israel” to get away with killing almost all professional reporters working in Gaza, along with untold numbers of other civilians.

While culpability is by no means exclusive to the Western mainstream press, it is unquestionably responsible for curating a global media discourse that manufactures the kind of doubt and hesitation that has permitted a livestreamed genocide to be perpetrated with full state complicity without consequence.

Perhaps the only valuable insight to be drawn from Marr’s affected and clearly unsuccessful attempt to pillory a journalist worth the title is that leading Western career journalists are, on some level, aware of their complicity. Like the endlessly weaponized accusations of anti-Semitism against opponents of the Israeli regime, it is not borne out of real anger but of a desperate attempt to intimidate those speaking the truth into silence.

There will inevitably come a point at which countless individuals and institutions in Western societies will be called to answer for their conduct during this genocide. That realization seems only now to be tentatively dawning on them.

October 24, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, War Crimes | , , | Leave a comment

Pursuing Net Zero Makes the UK Vulnerable to Bad Weather, BBC, Not Climate Change

By Linnea Lueken | ClimateRealism | October 21, 2025

A recent article at the BBC, “Government told to prepare for 2C warming by 2050,” claims that the United Kingdom needs to prepare for increasing extreme weather as the planet approaches 2°C warming. This is false in its framing. Although it’s always a good idea to harden infrastructure against weather, the UK is not suffering more extreme weather due to human emissions of carbon dioxide, and the recommendation of attempting to prevent temperature rise is not going to help anyone.

The BBC’s post discusses a letter written by the UK government’s “Climate Change Committee” (CCC), which the BBC reports said, “[t]he country was ‘not yet adapted’ to worsening weather extremes already occurring at current levels of warming, ‘let alone’ what was expected to come.”

The CCC asked the government to “set out a framework of clear long-term objectives” to prevent further temperature rise, with new targets every five years and departments “clearly accountable” for delivering those goals. It warned that “a global warming level of 2C would have significant impact on the UK’s weather, with extreme events becoming more frequent and widespread.”

These include increases in heatwaves, droughts, floods, and longer wildfire seasons.

These claims are fearmongering, and no amount of deindustrialization – which is what’s implied by the “objectives to prevent further temperature rise”—will stop bad weather from happening, nor will it have any measurable impact on global average temperature.

The simple fact is that the UK contributes a very small amount of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, which would in theory contribute an even smaller amount to warming. According to emissions data, the global share of all UK carbon dioxide emissions is 0.88 percent. Not even 1 percent. Eliminating UK emissions would do absolutely nothing to slow or stop any amount of warming that could be connected to human emissions, if they are, in fact, driving temperature changes.

On top of that, data do not show that weather is becoming more extreme in the UK.

The BBC claims that global warming will increase the wildfire season in the UK, and presumably they believe it must have already done so during the past 150 years of planetary warming. A longer wildfire season should result in more fires. Available data, however, does not show that wildfires are getting more frequent or more intense in the UK. Satellite data from Copernicus show no trend at all.

Chart of United Kingdom yearly burned area and number of fires from Copernicus

For another example, looking at Central England as this Climate Realism post did, the number of days per year breaching 25°C (77°F) show no rising trend, nor does the measured highest daily maximum.

Long term historical data for Europe show that drought is likewise not worse today than it was during the Renaissance, long before industrialization.

What is really notable is that Europe alone has actually already warmed 2°C since about 1820, according to historic European temperature averages, but no catastrophic change in weather has occurred. (See figure below)

Berkeley Earth average European temperature showing a 2.0°C rise since about 1820. Source: http://berkeleyearth.lbl.gov/regions/europe

Weather isn’t getting worse, but bad weather does still happen. The UK’s largest industrial solar facility, for example, blighting the landscape of Anglesey, North Wales, was recently destroyed by a bad storm. That should be enough to give government agencies pause when it comes to at least some net-zero policies, but the real point is that hardening infrastructure against weather should be a priority regardless of climate change. Bad weather will occur, and it will wreck fragile facilities, including solar complexes.

Hardening against weather extremes, which always have and always will exist, is just common sense. As technology develops and new ways of protecting against bad weather are discovered (like the invention of air conditioning) they should be implemented where they can be, as they can be. Achieving net zero – especially for a country that emits negligible amounts of greenhouse gases anyway—will not save the UK from bad weather events.

As a news organization, the BBC should not carry water for its government or government advisory boards that want to continue wasting money on futile “objectives to prevent further temperature rise” when direct efforts to improve infrastructure and harden it against weather extremes, which have happened throughout history, would be far more effective in saving lives and reducing harm.

October 23, 2025 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Malthusian Ideology, Phony Scarcity, Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

Hungary blasts ‘fake news’ about Putin-Trump meeting

RT | October 22, 2025

The Western media will continue to spread “fake news” aimed at derailing a summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart, Donald Trump, Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has warned.

Several outlets reported on Tuesday, citing unnamed White House officials, that plans for the meeting in the Hungarian capital had been put “on hold.”

Responding to the claims, Szijjarto took to X to warn that from the moment the meeting was announced following a phone call between Putin and Trump last week, “it was obvious that many would do everything possible to stop it from happening.”

“The pro-war political elite and their media always behave this way before events that could prove decisive between war and peace,” he added.

According to the foreign minister, it will be the same in the run-up to the talks in Budapest. “Until the summit actually takes place, expect a wave of leaks, fake news, and statements claiming that it will not happen,” Szijjarto said.

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov had earlier called the claims “infodumps,” intended to disrupt diplomatic progress on settling the Ukraine conflict. “EU and NATO countries are seeking to torpedo everything,” he said.

EU officials have publicly claimed that they would welcome another Putin-Trump meeting. However, El Pais has reported that behind closed doors, Brussels – which continues to support Ukraine and urge increased pressure on Russia – views the summit as a “political nightmare.”

On Tuesday, the Financial Times cited an unnamed EU diplomat as saying “no one likes it,” and that “we are all grinning through our teeth whilst saying this is fine.”

In the same article, the FT claimed that the talks in the Hungarian capital have been “canceled,” and that a White House official has said there are no plans for a Putin-Trump summit “in the immediate future.”

Russian presidential aide Kirill Dmitriev rejected the report, accusing the FT of “twisting” the comments by its source. “Preparations continue” for the Budapest summit, he wrote on X.

October 22, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , | Leave a comment

Repeating baseless, meddlesome remarks won’t solve anything: Iran to Poland

Press TV | October 21, 2025

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has hit back at Poland’s Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski over his “baseless claims and meddlesome remarks” against the Islamic Republic.

Araghchi made the comments in Polish on X, one day after Sikorski alleged that Iran was selling drones to Russia for use in the Ukraine war.

The top Iranian diplomat said that in an earlier X post, he had invited Sikorski to a substantive dialogue and exchange of documents to clarify facts following the display of a drone in the British Parliament, falsely and maliciously attributed to Iran.

“Avoiding responses, repeating baseless claims, and making meddlesome remarks will not solve the problem,” he added.

Araghchi also referred to Iran’s hospitality towards the Poles during the hard times of World War II, with the country providing shelter to over 100,000 Polish people and helping them form their own army.

“The friendship between the people of Iran and Poland was proven in challenging times, and it is our duty to protect this historical and cultural heritage,” he said.

He said the Iranian nation traces its roots to a glorious and significant past and that it will build its future on the path of progress and prosperity.

On October 14, Sikorski participated in an anti-Iran presentation at the UK Parliament in cooperation with a US-Israeli-affiliated group, displaying the wreckage of what they claimed to be an Iranian-made drone used by Russia in its war in Ukraine.

Iran summoned Poland’s chargé d’affaires in Tehran to protest Sikorski’s involvement in the anti-Iran event.

Araghchi also took to X to say that the “pathetic show” was staged by the Israel lobby and its supporters.

He said certain actors opposed to friendly Iran-Europe relations are creating fabricated narratives inconsistent with the long-standing ties between the two sides, including between Tehran and Warsaw.

Both Iran and Russia have repeatedly rejected allegations that Tehran supplied Moscow with drones, ballistic missiles, and related technology for use in the military campaign in Ukraine.

Russia has repeatedly warned against the flow of Western weapons to Ukraine, saying it prolongs the conflict.

October 21, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , | Leave a comment

Rick Sanchez: War Propaganda & Suffocating Censorship Weaken the West

Glenn Diesen | October 19, 2025

Award-winning journalist Rick Sanchez has worked for CNN, MSNBC, Fox News and RT, which gives him a unique perspective on the Western and Russian media. Sanchez outlines how the war propaganda and rise of censorship across the West prevent us from pursuing rational policies.

October 20, 2025 Posted by | Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Russophobia, Video | , , | Leave a comment

Iran dismisses ‘baseless’ allegations of seeking to threaten Britain’s security

Press TV – October 18, 2025

Iran’s embassy in London has strongly rejected allegations by the head of Britain’s MI5 that Tehran seeks to threaten the United Kingdom’s security, calling the claims “baseless and irresponsible.”

The diplomatic mission, in a statement released late on Friday, repudiated the assertions made by Sir Ken McCallum on October 16, which accused Iran of involvement in so-called “deadly plots” and “cross-border hostile actions.”

“The Embassy of the Islamic Republic of Iran expresses its strong protest to and outright rejection of these unfounded and irresponsible statements,” the statement read.

“Such baseless accusations are part of a continued effort to distort Iran’s policies and undermine bilateral diplomatic relations.”

The embassy emphasized that Iran firmly denies any involvement in violent acts, abductions, or harassment of individuals in the UK or elsewhere.

It further stated that the claims were made “without credible evidence,” and contradict Iran’s ongoing commitment to international law, the principle of sovereign equality, as well as promotion of peaceful coexistence and international cooperation.

The statement came after the MI5 chief alleged that UK security forces had thwarted 20 operations linked to Iran on British soil over the past year — a claim Tehran has dismissed as part of an ongoing campaign of misinformation.

The Iranian embassy urged the British government to “refrain from making or escalating baseless accusations” and instead pursue a “responsible and constructive approach based on dialogue and mutual respect” to address shared security concerns through legal and diplomatic channels.

The mission finally reaffirmed Iran’s preparedness for dialogue, and its commitment to international norms and peaceful international relations.

October 18, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , | Leave a comment

Once Again, Jeremy Bowen Is Misleading the British Public About Gaza

By Jonathan Cook | October 15, 2025

Yet again the BBC’s Jeremy Bowen is misrepresenting a key issue in Gaza – and as always, he is doing so in a way that places Israel in the most flattering light possible.

The BBC’s international editor notes two reasons why Hamas will not wish to disarm, as stipulated by Israeli and US officials:

a) Because having weapons is “deep in their ideological DNA”.

b) Because Hamas are worried that, if they are not armed, “there are plenty of people out there in Gaza who would like to take revenge on them and will come after them”.

Notice two things here:

First, both of these claims are rooted in Israeli rationales for why Hamas needs disarming. Inadvertently or not, Bowen is subtly suggesting that the group is inherently bloodthirsty, and that it does not properly represent the people of Gaza (more on that in a moment).

Second, Bowen ignores the main reason why Hamas wants to keep its weapons, one so obvious that it is simply astounding that he forgot to mention it.

Hamas believes that, if it is not armed, Israel will have an even freer hand to carry out its genocidal policies in Gaza, to continue its decades-long, illegal occupation of Palestinian lands, and to intensify its siege of the enclave. Hamas believes Israel’s violence against the Palestinian people should not be cost-free.

Whether or not one approves of Hamas’ approach – and to do so would be a violation of the UK’s Terrorism Act and could lead to a 14-year jail sentence – Bowen is required to report what the group actually thinks. Otherwise he is not a journalist, he is just another western propagandist.

Instead, he is actively misleading the British public both about Hamas’ worldview and about a core issue – Hamas’ disarmament – that could soon give Israel the excuse it seeks to trash the ceasefire agreement.

Like the rest of the BBC’s coverage, Bowen’s reporting refuses to address the elephant in the room: that Palestinians are caught in a trap crafted for them by the West. If they try to resist their illegal occupation by Israel, they are slaughtered and damned as terrorists. But if they don’t, they must live as permanent prisoners of an illegal, dehumanising occupation.

A further point: Bowen says Hamas are using their weapons to take on “armed clans who have weapons themselves – to reassert their power, to send a message to Gazans, ‘Don’t mess with us’.”

Bowen, of course, carefully ignores the part Israel has played in arming these criminal clans and letting them steal food aid. The clans sold that aid at inflated prices to a small section of Gaza’s population who could still afford to pay, while everyone else starved.

One doesn’t need to be a genius, or Hamas sympathiser, to imagine – contrary to Bowen’s implication that Hamas is widely feared by the population – that most people there may be relieved to see Hamas back and taking on the criminal gangs that extorted them and were central to the implementation of Israel’s genocidal starvation campaign.

October 15, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »