Zionism on the Upper East Side
By Patrick Lawrence | Consortium News | December 3, 2025
We watch in horror from afar as the Zionist terror state continues its genocide against the people of Gaza and escalates its slower-motion, lower-technology genocide against the 3 million Palestinians who reside in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, otherwise known as the Occupied Territories — illegally occupied, of course.
As a few Israeli commentators have pointed out — those few who guard their integrity— the operative principle here is the limitless impunity the Western powers have long granted “the Jewish state.”
This is the outcome, they say, when a people given to a culture of vengeance are told they will never suffer consequences however barbaric their conduct toward others, however many laws they break, however many their assassinations, however many their torture victims, however many exploding telephones they plant among civilian populations, etc.
Maybe we need no reminders, maybe we do, that this presumption of impunity is not bound by sovereign borders and is not limited to the cowardly, condemnable savagery of apartheid Israel in Gaza and the West Bank. But we had one last week, and it is well we consider it carefully.
Zohran Mamdani, the principled social democrat who is New York’s mayor-elect, is now under attack from Zionist Americans who insist Zionist Americans are above the law — American law and international law. You may look well on Mamdani and you may not, but as he is besieged by these objectionable people, so are we all.
This story begins on Wednesday, Nov. 19, at Park East Synagogue, a grand edifice that sits on East 67th Street between Third and Lexington Avenues in the Lenox Hill section of Manhattan.
Park East has been serving Modern Orthodox Jews since 1890. Its congregation, to be noted, is comprised of the great and good of the Upper East Side. These are observant but assimilated Jews, thoroughly plugged into, let’s say, secular public space.
Except.
Two Wednesdays back Park East hosted an organization dedicated to encouraging Jews to “make Aliyah,” the Hebrew term for emigrating to “the Promised Land.” O.K., you cannot find anything legally wrong in this, although it is unambiguously a moral wrong in that it expresses support for a genocidal state.
But let us set aside the moral question for now. The organization Park East sponsored, Nefesh B’Nefesh, also assists American Jews who wish to emigrate to Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territories. This is a legal matter and as such not inconsequential.
American Settlers
Statistics on the settler population in the West Bank and East Jerusalem are hard to nail down (and I can easily imagine why). The Times of Israel reported eight years ago that some 60,000 Americans were among the Jewish settlers in the West Bank.
That was roughly 15 percent of the settler population then — not counting the considerable number residing in East Jerusalem. We have no precise figures now, but these populations — settlers and Americans among the settlers — are both higher.
As has been well-reported, and well-recorded in several documentaries, the Americans among the West Bank settlers are frequently the most violent in their incessant attacks on Palestinians. They have also been at times the most readily inclined to murder.
There is the infamous case of Baruch Goldstein, a freakshow Zionist from Brooklyn who killed 29 Palestinians when he attacked the Ibrahimi Mosque (tomb of Abraham and other patriarchs) in Hebron in 1994. Goldstein was not singular: He was and remains exemplary — and a hero among some Zionists. National Security Minister Ben Givr had a picture of Goldstein on his living room wall until 2020.
I cannot name the precise statutes applicable here, but they must be several. Open and shut, just the facts, Ma’am, Nefesh B’Nefesh is an accomplice to the settler movement.
Most immediately significant in the Park East case, Nefesh B’Nefesh — this translates as “soul to soul,” and who knows what that is all about — is directly implicated in the settlers’ breach of international law given that all the settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem are illegal according to said law.
There was no claiming surprise that blustery Nov. 19th when a group of roughly 200 vociferous demonstrators gathered in front of Park East to protest the promotional seminar Nefesh B’Nefesh was running that day.
“Death to the IDF” was among the tamer of various chants; others encouraged violence against settlers. “It is our duty,” one leader of the demonstration said measuredly to those assembled, “to make them think twice before holding these events.”
Inside the Park East building, people indirectly but unmistakably promoting violence against Palestinians, land theft and all the rest. And on East 67th Street, righteous indignation, anger in behalf of a persecuted people, some violent rhetoric, but no violence.
It was obvious the mayor-elect would have to intervene. The event itself warranted this, and various Zionist constituencies, as well-reported before and since Mamdani’s election, have been attacking him as a radical jihadist, an anti–Semite and who knows what else, so attempting to poison his relations with New York’s Jewish community.
Here is the ever-poised Mamdani’s day-after statement, his first on the incident:
“The mayor-elect has discouraged the use of language used at last night’s protest and will continue to do so. He believes every New Yorker should be free to enter a house of worship without intimidation and that these sacred spaces should not be used to promote activities in violation of international law.”
A few days later, storms of protest from Zionist quarters having instantly erupted, Mamdani sent this statement to The New York Times:
“We will protect New Yorkers’ First Amendment rights while making clear that nothing can justify language calling for ‘death to’ anyone. It is unacceptable, full stop.”
I find these statements a little in the way of Solomon in their discernment, in Mamdani’s determination not to tilt his hand and to articulate the core truth of the matter:
The more extreme language out on East 67th Street was wrong so far as it intimidated synagogue goers, but the principle of free speech is nonetheless to be honored; those encouraging breaches of international law are wrong, and a synagogue should not be used to promote illegalities.
‘A Hateful Mob’
Maybe what has come back at Mamdani in the course of all this was predictable, more-of-the-same babble. “Mob” was the de rigueur term among those responding to the mayor-elect’s response.
The demonstrators were “a hateful mob of anti–Israel protesters,” the New York Post reported, and it got worse from there. Mamdani sided with “an anti–Semitic mob,” eJP, or eJewishphilanthropy.com, declared. “Last week,” this outfit continued, “Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani failed the first test of his promise to protect all New Yorkers.”
And from William Daroff, the chief exec of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations: “We are still judging him, and I’d say that at the moment he’s got a failing grade.”
They sitteth in judgment, you see.
O.K., we have heard all this before in one or another context, so has Mamdani. He is surely in for more of same once he assumes office Jan. 1. But we ought not miss the very much larger matters raised by the Park East incident.
There is the First Amendment question, as Mamdani correctly noted, and there are the legal questions as pencil-sketched above. These are related at the not-too-distant horizon.
People speaking for Nefesh B’Nefesh now deny they promote emigration to West Bank settlements — which, as the group’s website attests, is simply not true. It advertises Gush Etzion, an expanding sprawl of 22–and-counting settlements south of Jerusalem, Ma`ale Adumim, whose location makes it key to the Israelis final takeover of the West Bank, and various others.
“Teaching about Aliyah and Zionism belongs in that space”: This is the aforementioned William Daroff. And from eJP again: “Mamdani condemned the synagogue’s choice of programming.”
Choice of programming.
You see what is going on here. Park East and Nefesh B’Nefesh are encouraging Americans to breach international law. And absolutely to a one, those defending the synagogue and the event-organizer do so by pretending this is not what is most pithily at issue.
“We are deeply concerned by, and firmly condemn, the violent rhetoric and aggressive behavior that took place outside of the Park East Synagogue,” Nefesh B’Nefesh now declares on its website. Violent rhetoric and aggressive behavior on East 67th Street but not in the West Bank or in East Jerusalem.
To go straight to the point, this is another assertion of Zionist impunity. And we should understand what has lately transpired in New York as a very, very direct extension of the impunity that encourages and also protects the Israeli terror machine in Gaza and the West Bank. Impunity: It is a blight under which Palestinians suffer, and none of us is immune to it.
To put this another way, we witness an especially insidious case of chutzpah, the dangers of which I have considered elsewhere. You have your laws, the world has its, and we will ignore them before your eyes (and ostracize you as an anti–Semite if you object). This, in a sentence, is what Zionists now insist we must accept.
Capture, Terror, Genocide: The Systematic Annihilation of Palestine Under Netanyahu’s Leadership
By Viktor Mikhin – New Eastern Outlook – December 3, 2025
For over half a century, the bloody drama of Palestine’s occupation has dragged on, but in recent years, it has entered its darkest and most overt phase.
What was once disguised as “temporary security measures” or a “complex territorial dispute” now stands exposed for what it is: a deliberate, brutal, and systematic campaign of land seizure, the forced displacement of an entire people, and their incremental physical destruction. At the head of this process, as its chief architect and inspiration, is Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. His tools are the state apparatus, the military, and the wild gangs of so-called “settlers” who do the dirty work of clearing the land of its indigenous population.
Savages with a State License: Who Unleashes the Settlers?
The rhetorical question in this headline is no mystery. The answer is screamingly obvious to anyone who dares to look at the situation without the veil of propaganda. The violence perpetrated by Israeli settlers in the West Bank is not the “work of a small group of extremists,” as Netanyahu and his Western apologists hypocritically claim. It is part of a well-oiled system of demographic engineering, strategic land capture, and the fragmentation of Palestinian society.
These attacks are not chaotic pogroms. They are well-planned and coordinated raids that serve a clear purpose: to terrorize Palestinian families into fleeing their land so that Israel can confiscate it and hand it over to Jewish settlers. When settlers burn olive groves—centuries of Palestinian history and a source of livelihood for entire families—the army declares those lands a “security buffer zone.” When armed settler thugs drive Palestinian shepherds from their pastures, the military immediately establishes a “closed military zone” there. This is a criminal symbiosis: unofficial enforcers create “facts on the ground,” and the official state machine legitimizes and consolidates them.
The political ecosystem built by Netanyahu and his ultra-right allies doesn’t just condone this violence—it cultivates, funds, and protects it. The state builds roads for illegal outposts, provides them with electricity and water, and supplies them with armed protection. Ministers in Netanyahu’s government openly call for the “erasure” of Palestinian villages, the annexation of the West Bank, and the “voluntary transfer” of Palestinians—a euphemism for a policy of ethnic cleansing. When senior officials broadcast such slogans, Israeli settlers take them as a direct order to act. The state maintains “plausible deniability,” but its fingerprints are on every burned-out home, on every dead Palestinian.
The Army of Occupation: Accomplice and Guarantor of Impunity
The role of the Israeli army (IDF) in this process is far from passive observation. It is an active accomplice and the guarantor of impunity for settler terror. Numerous reports from human rights organizations, the UN, and even testimonies from former Israeli soldiers paint the same picture: soldiers stand by while settlers assault Palestinians, burn their property, and seize land. Military checkpoints are often used as entry points for settler gangs into Palestinian villages. Arrests, in the vast majority of cases, are used against Palestinians who dare to defend their homes and families.
This military logic is simple and cynical: settlers are viewed as allies, an extension of state expansionist policy, while Palestinians—even when they are the victims—are a priori considered a “security threat.” When an occupying army protects the criminals and punishes their victims, the occupation becomes something more—a system of organized persecution, a crime against humanity falling under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC).
Human Rights Watch and other authoritative organizations directly accuse Israel of committing war crimes and pursuing a policy aimed at the forced transfer of Palestinians. The International Court in The Hague has repeatedly confirmed that Israeli settlements constitute a gross violation of international law. But for Netanyahu and his cabinet, these verdicts are empty words. They understand perfectly well that condemnation will not be followed by any real accountability.
Netanyahu: Chief Architect of a Genocidal Policy
Benjamin Netanyahu is not merely a passive observer or a manager of a complex process. He is the ideological and practical inspiration behind a policy that is becoming increasingly difficult not to call genocide. Under his leadership, settlement expansion has reached unprecedented levels, and settler violence has been institutionalized as a tool of state policy. His rhetoric about a “small group of extremists” is a brazen lie designed to lull the international community to sleep.
The Netanyahu government has legalized dozens of illegal outposts built on stolen Palestinian land. It has directed millions of shekels to their infrastructure and security. It has brought outright racists and advocates of the “transfer” of Palestinians into the highest echelons of power, mainstreaming their ideas. When National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, an open supporter of the terrorist organization Kach, distributes weapons to settlers and calls for harsher strikes on Gaza, he does so with Netanyahu’s silent approval. This is not a deviation from the norm; it *is* the norm established by the Prime Minister.
The statistics speak more eloquently than any diplomatic trick. Since the start of the latest bloody massacre in Gaza in October 2023, Israeli forces and settlers have killed over 1,000 Palestinians in the West Bank. Hundreds of them are civilians. These numbers are not “collateral damage.” They are the result of a deliberate policy aimed at crushing any resistance to the occupation and creating unlivable conditions. The destruction of agricultural land, the blockade of cities, mass arrests, and extrajudicial killings—all are elements of a single plan to dismantle Palestinian society and expel the people from their land. This meets the definition of genocide under the UN Convention: creating conditions of life calculated to bring about the physical destruction of a group.
The International Community: Complicity and Hypocrisy
The response of the so-called “international community” to this ongoing genocide is a model of hypocrisy and political cowardice. Statements of “deep concern” from European capitals and even mild condemnations of “settler violence” from the U.S. State Department are nothing more than theater, designed to create an illusion of action. In reality, they provide cover for business as usual.
If Europe truly considers the settlements illegal, why does it continue profitable trade with them? Why are companies operating in the occupied territories not sanctioned? If the U.S. truly disagrees with Netanyahu’s policy, why does the annual $3.8 billion in military aid to Israel continue to flow without any conditions? This aid is a direct financial subsidy for the machinery of occupation and killing. Every bomb dropped on Gaza, every armored personnel carrier patrolling the city of Hebron, and every bayonet arming a settler is paid for by American taxpayers.
Even the recent call from four European powers—France, Germany, Italy, and the UK—for an end to settler violence remains an empty gesture as long as it is not followed by real consequences for Israel. Diplomacy without sanctions, condemnation without accountability—this is not just useless, it is immoral, for it makes the international community complicit in the crimes.
A Crime Without Punishment
The situation in Palestine today is not a “conflict between two sides.” It is an asymmetric war waged by a powerful, nuclear-armed state against a practically defenseless civilian population, stripped of statehood, rights, and hope. Under the leadership of Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel has finally cast off the mask and revealed itself as an aggressor state, pursuing a policy of apartheid, ethnic cleansing, and genocide.
The settlers are merely the shock troops, the vanguard of this policy. The army is its shield and sword. And the Netanyahu government is its brain and black heart. The system they have created works with frightening efficiency: localized terror, legalization of seizures, military cover, legal machinations, and an information smokescreen. The goal is clear: to finally bury the possibility of a viable Palestinian state and bring the “Eretz Israel” project to its logical conclusion across the entire territory of historic Palestine, regardless of the cost in Palestinian lives.
The world faces a choice: to continue watching this bloody spectacle, hiding behind diplomatic phrasing, or to finally call things by their true names and apply all measures of responsibility provided for by international law to the rogue state and its leaders. Silence and inaction are not neutrality. They are an endorsement of genocide. As long as Netanyahu and his regime are not brought to justice, and the Palestinian people do not obtain freedom and justice, the conscience of all humanity, and above all the Western world, will be stained with a bloody mark that can never be washed away.
Viktor Mikhin, Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, Expert on Middle Eastern Countries
World’s largest pension fund demands Microsoft disclose its dealings with Israel
The Cradle | December 2, 2025
Norway’s $2-trillion sovereign wealth fund announced on 2 December that it is stepping up pressure on Microsoft over human rights concerns linked to the Israeli army’s actions in Gaza, backing a shareholder demand for greater transparency on the company’s global operations.
The sovereign wealth fund, the largest in the world, said it will vote in favor of a proposal calling on Microsoft to publish a report outlining human rights risks in countries where its products are used in contexts of “significant” rights abuses.
The proposal, submitted by the shareholder group EICO, will be presented at Microsoft’s annual general meeting on 5 December.
Its intervention follows reports that Microsoft’s software and cloud tools were deployed by the Israeli military in Gaza and the occupied West Bank, prompting renewed scrutiny of the company’s role in a war marked by widespread allegations of war crimes.
The fund said Microsoft must disclose how it identifies human rights dangers in sensitive markets, and explain whether its internal controls are effective. It stressed that boards cannot ignore the environmental and social impact of the products they approve.
Microsoft’s management has opposed the proposal and urged shareholders to vote it down.
Norway’s fund holds a 1.35 percent stake valued at $50 billion as of 30 June, making it Microsoft’s second-largest equity holding after Nvidia. LSEG data ranks the fund as Microsoft’s eighth-largest shareholder overall.
The fund also announced it will vote against CEO Satya Nadella’s reappointment as chair of the board, continuing its long-standing policy against one person holding both the CEO role and the board chair role.
It will oppose his compensation package as well, criticizing the scale of US executive pay and calling for remuneration to be weighted toward shares locked for five to 10 years regardless of whether executives step down or retire.
The “say-on-pay” vote is advisory and does not bind Microsoft’s leadership, even if a majority of shareholders oppose the package.
Norway’s fund, known for its ethical investment criteria, has previously rejected Elon Musk’s Tesla pay package and sold stakes in 13 Israeli companies on ethical grounds.
Its push at Microsoft highlights rising investor resistance to technology firms whose products are implicated in abuses, including those documented during Israel’s genocide of Palestinians in Gaza.
Investigations by +972 Magazine, Local Call, and The Guardian have detailed how Microsoft’s cloud infrastructure became embedded in Israeli military intelligence operations.
Leaked documents and interviews with current and former personnel show that Unit 8200 was granted a dedicated section of the Azure platform to store and analyze vast collections of intercepted Palestinian communications, a system intelligence officers say later informed airstrike planning in Gaza.
The reporting also describes mounting internal dissent at Microsoft, with employees accusing the company of supplying tools that enable Israel’s mass surveillance architecture.
Protests have pushed the company to open internal reviews, even as it denies its technology was used to identify targets. Documents cited by Bloomberg show Microsoft sought FBI assistance to track demonstrations by staff demanding the company sever its ties with Israel.
US tech giants to expand role in post-war Gaza strategy: Report
Press TV – December 2, 2025
A new report has revealed that US-based artificial intelligence firms Palantir and Dataminr are positioning themselves to take on a pivotal role in shaping the post-war security framework proposed for the Gaza Strip.
According to a report by the Israeli-Palestinian publication +972 Magazine on Tuesday, the companies have been integrated into the newly established Civil-Military Coordination Center (CMCC), a US-run operational hub in the southern part of the occupied territories where Washington and Israeli officials are coordinating the implementation of President Donald Trump’s 20-point plan for Gaza.
An official seating chart reviewed by +972 indicates that a “Maven Field Service Representative” from Palantir, referencing their battlefield analytics platform Project Maven, is assigned to the CMCC.
The hub, situated approximately 20 kilometers from the northern Gaza boundary, was opened in mid-October and currently accommodates around 200 US military personnel.
Project Maven, for which Palantir recently secured a $10 billion Pentagon contract to upgrade, gathers intelligence from various sources such as satellites, drones, spy planes, intercepted communications, and online platforms, reorganizing it into an “AI-powered battlefield platform” aimed at expediting military decision-making, including lethal airstrikes.
Palantir executives have described the system as “optimizing the kill chain,” and it has been previously utilized in US operations in Yemen, Syria, and Iraq.
Palantir has also strengthened its partnerships with Israeli forces during the current war, following a strategic agreement signed in January 2024 to support “war-related missions,” and has expanded its recruiting in Tel Aviv, doubling the size of its office over the past two years.
CEO Alex Karp has defended the collaboration amid international concerns over war crimes, saying that the company was the first to be “completely anti-woke.”
Documents reviewed by +972 also reveal the involvement of Dataminr, a US surveillance company, in internal CMCC presentations.
Dataminr, which utilizes AI to scan and analyze global social-media streams in real time, promotes its platform as providing “event, threat, and risk intelligence,” and has established partnerships with X to provide governments and law-enforcement agencies, including the FBI, with extensive access to public social-media data.
Both companies are expected to shape the “Alternative Safe Communities” model proposed under the Trump plan, which suggests relocating Palestinian civilians into fenced, heavily monitored compounds controlled by US and Israeli forces.
Within these zones, systems enabled by Palantir and Dataminr would be used to track mobile phones, monitor online activity, analyze movement, and flag individuals classified by AI as security risks.
Critics and analysts argue that this arrangement mirrors the predictive surveillance already deployed in Gaza over the past two years, including the AI-driven Lavender system used by Israel to create kill lists of suspected Hamas affiliates, which included public-sector employees such as police and medical workers.
Human-rights observers caution that such technologies have contributed to the extensive targeting of Palestinian families during an ongoing genocide.
The integration of US tech companies into the CMCC underscores a privatized model of occupation, one that sidelines Palestinian participation while expanding the role of AI-enabled policing, according to analysts.
For technology firms, the war presents an opportunity to access vast datasets and conduct real-world testing for new military systems.
Additionally, for Israel, it offers a way to outsource parts of the occupation while maintaining extensive control over Gaza’s population.
Europe just made Russia’s case for Odessa

By Gerry Nolan | The Islander | November 30, 2025
When you authorize naval-drone terrorism against Russian civilian oil tankers in the Black Sea, don’t whine when Moscow redraws the coastline. You wanted escalation? Fine. Now watch your proxy lose Odessa, and with it access to the Black Sea.
Washington is hunting for a face-saving imperfect peace after admitting Russia can’t be beaten. But London, and the EU — delusional, hysterical, and terrified of the coming reckoning from their own populations – keeps pushing the kind of escalation that guarantees one outcome: Russia removing Ukraine’s coastline so the Black Sea can’t be used as NATO’s private terrorism platform. Every naval-drone attack, every strike on a tanker, every British engineered terror op doesn’t weaken Russia, it strengthens Russia’s moral, legal and military argument for needing Odessa.
On Nov 21, Ukraine launched a MAGURA V5 naval drone packed with ~200 kg of explosives at the Russian tanker SIG, a civilian vessel transporting fuel. Earlier, on September 13, a coordinated drone-and-missile strike hit Sevastopol’s shipyard, damaging a patrol ship and igniting a fire visible for kilometres. In October, multiple MAGURA V5 drones attempted to strike the Sergey Kotov, a patrol corvette, the footage released by Ukraine’s GUR bears the hallmark of British-assisted targeting and mission-planning systems. The pattern is undeniable, Ukraine’s entire maritime warfare capability is thanks to the West.
These naval drones didn’t glide across the Black Sea on luck and instinct. With operational ranges approaching 800 kilometers, Ukraine’s MAGURA V5 drones strike far beyond coastal waters, but only with the eyes and brains of NATO. They rely on Western ISR: real-time satellite feeds from the UK and France, RQ-4 Global Hawk patrols off Romania, Starlink uplinks beaming mission data, and British-assisted target coordination. Europe wasn’t just observing. It was triangulating and commanding. And now, after cheering on attacks launched with AI-assisted maritime drones and foreign-fed targeting, Europe feigns shock that Moscow may erase access to the very coastline launching them.
Europe is not supporting Ukraine. Europe is sacrificing it, with full knowledge of what these strikes provoke. Every official in Brussels, London, and Paris understands Russia’s red lines, they’ve memorized them for years. They know that attacking civilian tankers, port infrastructure, and Black Sea Fleet assets from a Nato-commanded coastline forces Moscow to harden the entire southern theater. Yet they push Zelensky, their puppet, into terror operations that guarantee Odessa becomes a battlefield and cease forever to be a bargaining chip.
When a coastline becomes a NATO forward-operating platform masquerading as a proxy state, removing that coastline becomes self-defense. Europe knows this. Washington knows this. That is precisely why Europe, cornered and terrified of the political reckoning on its own soil, keeps escalating. Starmer fears British rage at the coming humiliation. Macron fears the streets of France. They all know what’s coming.
And here lies the supreme irony: the same political caste that spent decades sneering that Russia was “a glorified gas station” is now petrified at the thought of facing Russia without American cover.
Moscow now has zero incentive to leave a hostile coastline intact. Landlock Kiev. Neutralize NATO’s Black Sea fantasies.
When Odessa falls, Europe will shriek “aggression,” pretending not to remember who designed the drones, who funded and commanded the operations, daring Russia to respond. But the world will remember. And history will not record this as conquest. It will record it as the foreclosure of a coastline weaponized by Europe’s own madness.
Russia will will by turn the map into a verdict, one future generations of Europeans will demand their leaders answer for, and there will be hell to pay for the betrayal of Europe.
US, Israel fear leak of tech secrets from unexploded bomb in Beirut
MEMO | December 1, 2025
US and Israeli officials have reportedly demanded the Lebanese government to urgently secure the transfer of an unexploded Israeli air bomb in the southern suburbs of Beirut to its possession, fearing it might fall into the hands of Russia or China and allow them access to its advanced military technology.
According to the Hebrew newspaper Ma’ariv, unnamed sources say the bomb is a smart glide munition, model GBU-39B, manufactured by the US firm Boeing, and was used by the Israeli Air Force in a strike targeting Hitham Ali Tabtaba’i — described as the chief of staff of Hezbollah — within the group’s stronghold in southern Beirut.
Ma’ariv adds that although the bomb was used in the assassination attempt, it did not explode for reasons that remain unclear, and remained relatively intact at the scene of the attack. This has raised concern in Washington about the possibility that foreign powers — specifically Russia or China — could recover it and study its technology.
The report notes that the bomb carries a warhead “exceptionally powerful for its weight”, as well as guidance systems and technology not currently believed to be held by Moscow or Beijing — making its recovery a priority for the United States.
Maduro Delivers Defiant Message After Trump Told Venezuelan Leader to Flee
By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | December 1, 2025
On a phone call held between Donald Trump and Nicolas Maduro, the President ordered the Venezuelan leader to flee his country. Following leaks about the phone call, Maduro issued a defiant public address.
The Miami Herald reported on Sunday that during the phone call held last week, Trump told Maduro, “You can save yourself and those closest to you, but you must leave the country now.” The sources said Trump offered Maduro and his family safe passage from Venezuela only if he offered his immediate resignation.
The Venezuelan leader appears to have rejected Trump’s deal. On Sunday, at the end of his public remarks, Maduro chanted that Venezuela is “indestructible, untouchable, unbeatable.”
Over the past week, the concerns that the US could begin military operations inside Venezuela have peaked. Washington has engaged in a massive military buildup in the Caribbean. The Pentagon has destroyed about two dozen boats in the region, claiming the vessels were carrying narcotics.
Multiple outlets have reported that the White House is discussing expanding operations into Venezuela. Trump added to the fear of a new war when he told troops on Thanksgiving the operations inside Venezuela would “begin soon” and posted on Truth Social that Venezuelan airspace was closed.
Officials told the Miami Herald that the call was a last ditch effort to avoid a war in Venezuela.
The strikes on drug boats in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific are unconstitutional, illegal, and war crimes. Expanding the strikes to inside Venezuela, or conducting a regime change in Caracas, would shatter the constraints the Constitution places on Presidential war powers.
Kiev’s Black Sea attack infringed on NATO state’s sovereignty – Kremlin
RT | December 1, 2025
Ukraine’s attacks on commercial tankers in the Black Sea last week constituted an “outrageous” infringement of Turkish sovereignty, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said.
His comments follow several strikes by explosives-laden sea drones on two Gambian-flagged tankers, Kairos and Virat, which were sailing off the Turkish coast en route to the Russian port of Novorossiysk. On Saturday, another drone attacked a crude hub on Russia’s Black Sea coast belonging to the Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC), operated by Russia, Kazakhstan, the US, and several Western European nations.
Speaking to journalists on Monday, Peskov stated that the attacks on the tankers represent a direct violation of the rights of the vessels’ owners and an encroachment on the sovereignty of the Turkish republic.
He told reporters that the Kremlin views the incidents as serious and noted that such attacks could have implications for ongoing diplomatic efforts.
Peskov added that the strikes showed “the essence of the Kiev regime,” adding that attacks on international energy-related assets damage commercial property and maritime security.
Previously, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova also condemned Kiev for the “terrorist attacks” on international civilian energy infrastructure. She suggested that they may have been an effort by Kiev to undermine international peace efforts and divert attention away from a major corruption scandal involving the country’s senior officials, as well as Ukraine’s continued battlefield setbacks.
Türkiye has also voiced concern about the attacks, saying they occurred within its exclusive economic zone and posed “serious risks” to navigation and the environment.
While Kiev has not officially claimed responsibility for the attacks, several Ukrainian and Western news outlets have reported, citing sources, that the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) orchestrated the strikes.
US faces outrage over killing of survivors in Caribbean strike
Al Mayadeen | November 29, 2025
The US is facing renewed scrutiny after reports emerged that US forces carried out a second strike on a disabled boat in the Caribbean, extrajudicially killing people who survived an initial missile attack.
Accounts published by the Washington Post, CNN, and earlier by The Intercept indicate that the September 2 attack unfolded under a direct instruction from War Secretary Pete Hegseth to ensure no one on the vessel remained alive.
Citing individuals familiar with the mission, the Washington Post reported that personnel were told “the order was to kill everybody.” The strike formed part of a wider campaign targeting boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific that Washington claims were transporting narcotics through international waters. Publicly released figures compiled by AFP suggest that at least 83 people have been killed since these operations began, though the administration has not provided evidence substantiating its allegations against the vessels.
Illegal orders
According to the Washington Post, US forces saw two people clinging to the burning wreckage after the first strike and then hit the vessel again. Following this episode, internal rules were revised to require rescuing any survivors. CNN noted that it remains unclear whether Hegseth had been informed about survivors before the follow-up attack.
Hegseth, addressing criticism on social media on Friday, insisted that “current operations in the Caribbean are lawful under both US and international law” and dismissed reports on the incident as “fake news,” though he did not mention the September strike specifically.
The Justice Department has meanwhile maintained that the campaign complies with the laws governing armed conflict. The Pentagon has told lawmakers that the United States is engaged in an “armed conflict” with Latin American drug cartels and has categorized suspected smugglers as “unlawful combatants.”
War crimes
The allegations have triggered political backlash in Washington. Democratic congressman Seth Moulton wrote on X that the “killing of survivors is blatantly illegal” and warned, “Mark my words: It may take some time, but Americans will be prosecuted for this, either as a war crime or outright murder.”
The revelations surface amid controversy over a video released this month by Democratic lawmakers reminding military personnel that they may refuse illegal orders, a message that prompted Donald Trump to brand them “traitors.”
International pressure is also mounting. UN Human Rights chief Volker Turk urged the United States to examine the legality of the strikes, stating that there is “strong evidence” they amount to “extrajudicial” killings.
Trump’s ‘drug boat’ attacks mirror controversial Obama-era tactic – NYT
RT | November 28, 2025
US airstrikes on suspected drug smugglers in the Caribbean ordered by President Donald Trump bear similarities to the controversial ‘signature strikes’ on purported terrorists under former President Barack Obama, the New York Times has argued.
The Obama-era operations conducted primarily in Pakistan and Yemen relied on detecting patterns of behavior that US intelligence agencies claimed indicated terrorist activity, rather than identifying wrongdoing by specific individuals. Critics condemned the approach for its vague criteria – sometimes as broad as ‘military-age male’ in an area prone to militancy – and for resulting in civilian casualties.
Pentagon officials have acknowledged in closed-door briefings that they often do not know the identities of the people killed in what the White House calls a campaign against “narcoterrorism” in the Caribbean, the NYT reported on Thursday. Despite this, US officials insist that the comparison does not apply, arguing that the strikes are aimed at narcotics rather than individuals.
“They told us it is not a signature strike, because it’s not just about pattern of life, but it’s also not like they know every individual person on the boats,” Representative Sara Jacobs, a member of the House Armed Services Committee, told the outlet.
The Obama administration’s killings of low-level militants and people merely assumed to be militants was criticized as counterproductive and fueling further radicalization. Trump officials reportedly argued that attacking boats at sea reduces the risk of collateral damage.
Some US allies, including the UK, have reportedly declined to assist with the ‘drug boat’ strikes, warning that they could violate international law. The campaign has already resulted in more than 80 deaths.
Analysts increasingly suspect that the operations could be laying the groundwork for a regime-change effort in Venezuela, whose president, Nicolas Maduro, the US accuses of leading a criminal cartel.
After 75 years: Could Israel actually lose its UN membership this time?
By Dr Mohammad Yousef | MEMO | November 27, 2025
On 24 November 2025, civil-society actors in Chile launched a campaign calling for the expulsion of Israel from United Nations, invoking UN Charter Article 6. They base their call on what they describe as “continuous and systematic violations” of international humanitarian law and repeated breaches of UN resolutions, particularly in light of ongoing Genocide in Gaza and the humanitarian crisis there.
Article 6 of the UN charter states: “A Member of the United Nations which has persistently violated the principles contained in the present Charter may be expelled from the Organization by the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council.”
This is not the first such call. In September 2025, following Israeli airstrikes on Qatar targeting Hamas officials, Pakistan demanded Israel’s suspension or expulsion from the UN for violating international law and threatening international peace and security. Pakistan’s UN ambassador warned that Israel’s actions risked regional stability and global lawlessness.
Similarly, Francesca Albanese, UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT), has repeatedly urged Israel’s suspension from the UN, Citing the crime of genocide that Israel committed against Palestinians. Targeting UN premises, violating the UN charter and labeling the UN as a terrorist organization.
The UN Charter provides mechanisms for suspension or expulsion of member states under Articles 5 and 6, while Article 6 deals with the expulsion, Article 5 deals with the suspension.
Historically and since its inception after World War II, the UN has never expelled or suspended any state member from the organization under Articles 5 and 6 of the Charter. However, the attempt to block South Africa from attending UNGA meetings was successful, following the U.N. General Assembly approval of the Credentials Committee’s recommendation to cancel the credentials of South Africa, citing the country’s Apartheid-era racial policies.
Multiple attempts were made in order to expel Israel from the UN in the past, but all of them remained unsuccessful due to either political pressure or threats to use the Veto power. The first attempt was in 1975 when Algeria and Syria led a joint campaign aiming for the suspension of Israel from the UNGA, this step requires the recommendation of the UNSC, and due to the U.S veto threat the process was halted. However, alternative ways were explored in order to isolate Israel leading to the UNGA Resolution 3379 adopted in November 1975, which declared Zionism to be “a form of racism and racial discrimination”.
Another attempt was organized by 34 Muslim states and the Soviet Union (USSR). These states sent a letter to the UN General Assembly Credentials Committee requesting Israel’s expulsion from the UNGA. The letter stated:
… “Israel’s continued defiance and its flagrant and persistent violation of the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law. Furthermore, we wish to reiterate Israel’s contempt and its defiant challenge to the resolutions of the United Nations as they relate to the question of Palestine and the situation in the Middle East.”
The states further emphasized Israel’s non-adherence to the UN Charter and its violations of obligations, arguing that this makes Israel a non–peace-loving state, which is a requirement for UN membership. This attempt was obstructed by Israel’s allies in the US and western countries. As a result, it failed to gain the required two-thirds majority and remained unsuccessful.
IN 2018, the Kenest passed the Nation-State bill, which in its Article 1(a) states that: “The Land of Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish People, in which the State of Israel was established. “The president of the Palestinian Authority (PA), Mahmoud Abbas, called the Nations-State Law, “Illegitimate, Racist and apartheid”. Following this, and in response to this Law, the PA lunched an initiative calling for Israel’s expulsion form the UN. However, this initiative failed and did not progress due to the U.S threat to cut UN funding.
Given the above precedent, the campaign to expel Israel from the UN is legally grounded — but faces dıfrrent types of political pressure and institutional barriers. Any real proposal would require: (a) adoption by the Security Council; (b) absence of vetoes by any of the five permanent members (P5). Given current geopolitical alignments, particularly the support for Israel by some P5 states, such a proposal is unlikely to pass.
Nevertheless, the fact that the legal mechanism exists, coupled with mounting global outrage over Israel’s violations and Genocide in Gaza — equip the call with significant symbolic and political weight. Even if immediate expulsion is unrealistic, pressing for such a step can be part of a broader strategy of international isolation, reputational pressure, and incremental delegitimization.
Because expulsion or suspension of a state member from the UN under Article 5 and 6 is difficult, as it must go through the UNSC and most likely face U.S Veto power. As of September 2025, the U.S has used its veto 51 times to shield Israel. Acting within the framework of the UN General Assembly has a greater chance of success, particularly given the recent overwhelming support for Palestine and the noticeable shift in many states’ positions in favour of Palestine.
In May 2024, by an overwhelming majority vote, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution supporting the Palestinians’ right to admission to the UN and to obtain full membership in the organization. The resolution passed with 143 votes in favor, 9 against, and 25 abstentions. Similarly, in September 2024, the UNGA adopted a resolution calling on Israel to bring an end without delay its unlawful presence, the resolution passed with 124 votes in favour,14 against, and 43 abstentions. On 12 September 2025, the “New York Declaration” supporting a two-state solution was endorsed by 142 UN member states, with just 10 votes against and 12 abstentions.
As with the South Africa case, the credentials of Israel’s delegation can be blocked following a letter to the UNGA Credentials Committee and a two-thirds majority vote by UNGA member states. This scenario is likely to succeed, given the growing global support for the rights of the Palestinian people within the UN.
There is another alternative: appealing to the UN General Assembly resolution “Uniting for Peace.” Adopted on 3 November 1950 (during the Korean War), it was designed to empower the GA when the Security Council is deadlocked by vetoes. Under this mechanism, the GA can convene special emergency sessions and recommend collective measures—including economic, political, or even armed action—against states threatening peace when the UNSC fails to act.
Since proclaiming itself a state on historic Palestine, Israel has repeatedly been accused of war crimes, genocide, and violations of the UN Charter, posing serious threats to international peace. After October 7th, 2023 until today, over 100,000 Palestinians have been killed by Israel, more than 1.9 million Gazans and tens of thousands of West Bankers have been forcibly displaced by Israel, Gaza’s healthcare and educational systems massively destroyed by Israel. Within a year or less, Israel has attacked seven countries, violating their sovereignty and territorial integrity, including, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, Qatar, Iran, Tunisia, and the occupied Palestinian territories. Israel continues to expand its occupation and settlements into the West Bank and Syria, planning de jure annexations and maintaining indefinite military presence.
Given that Israel faces no serious international pressure and collective sanctions, the UN and international community—including states and NGOs—must apply maximum pressure through all possible means. The call to expel Israel from the UN or the suspension of its membership are not a rhetorical measure only — they rest on the clear text of Articles 5 and 6 of the UN Charter. Yet, Political pressure, institutional realities — especially the veto power of the Security Council’s permanent members can halt any efforts in this regard.
In this very critical moment in the prolonged legitimate struggle of the Palestinian people against the apartheid regime in Israel, calling for Israel’s expulsion or suspension from the UN, or blocking its credentials in the UNGA, is not only justified but necessary to stop the ongoing genocide and grave violations. States and the international community, through the UN, are obligated to translate diplomatic commitments into tangible actions—isolating Israel politically, legally, economically, and diplomatically—and holding it accountable for its crimes and violations of the UN Charter and international law.
