From the United States to Europe, criticizing Israel is becoming a crime
By Kit KLARENBERG | MintPress News | April 29, 2025
Across the United States and much of the West, criticism of Israel and solidarity with Palestine are increasingly being criminalized—a project long championed by Israel’s government and its powerful lobbying networks.
In February 2020, Israeli leader and internationally wanted war criminal Benjamin Netanyahu proudly declared that Tel Aviv had “promoted laws in most U.S. states” to punish those who boycott Israel, offering a rare glimpse into the foreign forces eroding free speech in the American heartland.
Since then, anti-boycott laws have quietly spread to dozens of states, forcing public institutions, businesses, and even individual contractors to pledge loyalty to Israel—or risk losing jobs, contracts, and funding. What began as a niche effort to shield Tel Aviv from grassroots criticism has rapidly escalated into a sweeping assault on free speech across the Western world.
The overwhelming majority of states now boast laws making it illegal for local entities, including hospitals and schools, to work with individuals or companies that boycott Israel. For example, in 2016, Indiana’s Senate unanimously passed a law calling for mandatory divestment by state agencies, commercial enterprises, and nonprofit organizations—including universities—from any firm involved in “the promotion of activities to boycott, divest from, or sanction Israel.”
The legislation branded boycotts against Israel as “antithetical and deeply damaging to the cause of peace, justice, equality, democracy and human rights for all people in the Middle East.”
Several states have adopted comparable laws via governors signing administrative and executive orders. In some cases, state contractors—be they individuals or organizations—are legally obligated to demonstrate their anti-BDS credentials by signing contractual affirmations of non-support for BDS, which critics argue is essentially a loyalty oath to Israel.
State employees, including teachers, have lost their jobs for refusing to do so. In May 2021, a federal judge ruled such legislation in Georgia to be “unconstitutional compelled speech.” Undeterred, Georgia Governor Brian Kemp reintroduced the requirement just months later with slight amendments.
Israel’s extraordinary and ever-growing influence over domestic U.S. laws in recent years, and the devastating consequences for Palestinian solidarity at home and abroad, have passed without much critical mainstream acknowledgement, let alone censure.
Since October 7, the push to criminalize pro-Palestinian sentiment Stateside and the media’s mass omertà (code of silence) on this disturbing crusade have both intensified significantly. However, such disquieting developments aren’t restricted to the U.S., but eagerly embraced by an ever-growing number of countries intimately complicit in the Gaza genocide.
‘Drastic Rise’
In a grave testament to the speed with which U.S.-based pro-Israel organizations, including several prominent Jewish advocacy groups, sought to capitalize on October 7 for their own purposes, two-and-a-half weeks after Palestinian fighters breached Gaza’s infamous apartheid walls, Republican lawmaker Mike Lawler proposed H.R. 6090, also known as the Antisemitism Awareness Act.
Lawler is a major recipient of Israeli lobby funds, with the influential lobbying group AIPAC gifting him $392,669 in 2023 and 2024 alone, his largest donor by some margin. His bill would require the Department of Education to consider the highly controversial International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism (which critics argue conflates criticism of Israel with antisemitism) when determining if cases of harassment are motivated by antisemitism, raising concerns that it would violate the intent of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
This, its proponents argue, “prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin in programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance,” including colleges and universities. H.R. 6090 is openly supported by nearly all influential pro-Israel organizations, including the ADL.
The IHRA definition has been condemned by many, including attorney Kenneth Stern, who helped draft it, for falsely conflating legitimate criticism of Israel with antisemitism. The ACLU warns that H.R. 6090 raises the clear risk that U.S. educational facilities will “restrict student and faculty speech critical of the Israeli government and its military operations,” for fear of “losing federal funding.”
Longstanding U.S. law already prohibits antisemitic discrimination and harassment by federally funded entities, making the proposed legislation completely unnecessary.
Despite the obvious and dire threats to fundamental freedoms posed by the bill, and even harsh criticisms from major Jewish groups (such as J Street and Jewish Voice for Peace), it received barely any mention by major news outlets. Still, Congress supported it by an overwhelming majority, voting 320 to 91 in its favor.
Senators nonetheless failed to consider the legislation, prompting Congressman Josh Gottheimer, who received $797,189 from AIPAC in 2023 and 2024, to reintroduce the bill in February. In the meantime, U.S. lawmakers again took a deeply worrying step in Israel’s clear favor.
On November 28, 2023, Congressman David Kustoff—another AIPAC beneficiary—introduced a House Resolution “strongly condemning and denouncing the drastic rise of antisemitism” in the U.S. and “around the world” following October 7. Citing the IHRA’s antisemitism definition, it declared that popular Palestine solidarity chants—protected by the First Amendment—“From the River to the Sea,” “Palestine Will Be Free,” and “Gaza Will Win” to be genocidal, and claimed that a candlelit vigil at the Democratic National Committee that month had endangered lives.
It concluded by calling on Congress to “clearly and firmly [state] that anti-Zionism is antisemitism,” which they did inordinately. In all, 311 lawmakers voted for the Resolution, with just 14 against.
Niko House, a media personality and activist specializing in civil rights and anti-imperialist issues, believes that these efforts are desperate attempts to justify legal measures that threaten civil liberties and would be unthinkable if any other country were in the crosshairs—including the U.S. itself.
“If enacted, these laws will give authorities broad license to persecute anyone and everyone who calls attention to the unprecedented levels of discrimination Palestinians experience today, and have done for over 75 years,” House tells MintPress. He reserves particular contempt for H.R. 6090:
“As a Black man, I find it deeply insulting [that] Congress would exploit the Civil Rights Act to silence, if not criminalize, pro-Palestine sentiment. Whether it be segregation, freedom to attend whatever educational institution or pursue whatever career you choose, or equal and indiscriminate access to facilities and basic sustenance like food and water, Palestinians have been suffering from the very forms of discrimination the Act was created to protect against ever since Israel’s creation. And the Gaza genocide has made all of this even worse.”
‘Targeting Critics’
Such brazen pro-Israeli lawfare is a longstanding tradition in modern American politics. In 1977, two amendments to the Export Administration Act and the U.S. Tax Code were passed. In theory, they prohibited U.S. citizens and companies from complying with foreign boycotts against any country considered “friendly” to Washington. In reality, it was specifically intended to counteract the long-running embargo of Israel by the Arab League. Most U.S. allies adopted the prohibition, in some cases ironically damaging their relations with Israel.
Then in 1987, Ronald Reagan designated the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO)—at the time recognized almost universally as the Palestinian people’s legitimate representatives—a terrorist entity, but enacted a waiver the next year permitting “contact” between White House officials and the group.
This fudge meant the Organization was forced to shut down its D.C. office and cease most of its formal international diplomatic and fundraising initiatives, but allowed U.S. authorities to continue to engage with its leadership without legal repercussions.
There are sinister historical echoes, too, in yet another post-October 7 Congressional move in the U.S. On December 12, 2023, Mariannette Miller-Meeks, a fervently pro-Israel lawmaker who has received vast sums from the Israeli lobby while cosponsoring and voting in favor of multiple pro-Israel measures that critics argue suppress Palestinian rights and run afoul of the First Amendment, proposed H.R. 6578. It calls for the creation of an official “Commission to Study Acts of Antisemitism” in the U.S.
The legislation’s clauses exclusively refer to “antisemitism” in the context of criticism of Israel’s actions in Gaza after October 7. Its accompanying press release clearly shows that Palestine solidarity activists are its intended targets, particularly college and university students. Under its auspices, a formal Congressional investigation into opposition to Israel among U.S. citizens and organizations would be instigated, and any witness subpoenaed to give evidence would be barred from invoking their constitutional right to remain silent under questioning.
Lara Friedman, Middle East Forum for Peace President, slammed the proposal as a malign attempt to construct a modern equivalent to the infamous House Un-American Activities Committee (which investigated suspected supporters of communism during the Cold War). Established by Senator Joe McCarthy in 1938, the Committee probed the political leanings of private citizens, state employees, and public and government organizations. In the process, countless careers and lives were destroyed. Friedman charges H. R. 6578 will, by design, do the same—“but this time targeting critics of Israel.”
‘Disruptive Policies’
It would be wrongheaded to view this wave of repressive laws as unique or isolated to the U.S., or exclusively a product of the Gaza genocide. In the wake of October 7, authorities in Germany, which quietly supported Israel’s illicit nuclear weapons program for years, unleashed an unprecedented crackdown against Palestine solidarity activists and groups. The repression came in the form of brutal assaults on protest attendees of all ages and genders, city and state courts convicting people for leading pro-Palestinian chants, and restrictions on speaking foreign languages at public demonstrations.
German city and state governments have banned or are considering banning displays of red triangles (a symbol adopted by some Palestinian resistance fighters). As of June 2024, applicants for German citizenship are now tested on their knowledge of Judaism and Jewish life. They must declare their belief in Israel’s right to exist to prove their commitment to “German values.” Legal experts and rights advocates have widely questioned the constitutionality of requiring political support for a foreign state as a condition for citizenship.
This wave of legal repression is not confined to Germany. Across the English Channel, British authorities have similarly intensified their crackdown on dissent. In February 2024, three individuals were convicted of terror offenses in Britain after displaying images of paragliders at a Palestine solidarity protest on the controversial grounds that it amounted to “glorification of the actions” of Hamas. Since then, multiple British pro-Palestinian activists and journalists have been arrested, raided, and prosecuted over allegations of “supporting” Hamas. In December 2024, the UN sounded an alarm over London’s “vague and over-broad” counter-terror legislation.
These laws do not define the term ‘support,’ which the UN believes raises the risk of dissenting individuals who cannot plausibly be accused of endorsing “violent terrorist acts” by proscribed groups, including their political wings, being caught up in the legislation’s sweeping dragnet. Undeterred, authorities have only intensified their harassment of Palestine solidarity voices since.
Naila Kauser, an activist currently wanted for questioning by counter-terror police in London for pro-Palestinian statements she purportedly made on social media, tells MintPress News :
“Attacks against activists and journalists who speak out against the genocide in Palestine can only be described as an abuse of law, in service of fascism. It is the British state that is violating multiple world laws, including the Genocide Convention, by continuing to support Israel through intelligence-sharing, arms trade, and diplomatic protection of Israeli war criminals, as we saw recently with the Israeli Foreign Minister’s not-so-secret visit to London. Britain proscribing those who fight occupation also undermines their internationally recognised legal right to resist.”
Electronic Intifada editor Asa Winstanley, whose London home was raided and digital devices seized by counter-terror police at dawn in October 2024, suggests to MintPress News that the British government’s December 2016 adoption of the IHRA’s misdefinition of antisemitism may have played a role in the wave of repression targeting “legitimate dissent, protest, and political action” against crimes committed by the Israeli state. He says that the controversial definition, reportedly influenced by Israeli intelligence, “does nothing to protect Jews or anyone else — its primary aim is to criminalize Palestinians and their supporters.”
Winstanley cites the striking example of a London council in 2019 using the IHRA’s definition of antisemitism to ban a local pro-Palestinian bike ride seeking to raise money for sports equipment for Gazan children from traveling through its parks. “This wasn’t a direct action, it wasn’t anything to do with Jewish people, it wasn’t discrimination, it was pure solidarity of the fluffiest kind, and even this was officially found to fall foul of the IHRA definition,” Winstanley warned.
‘Moral Authority’
In June 2023, the ponderously titled Economic Activity of Public Bodies (Overseas Matters) Bill began making its way through British Parliament. Its purpose is to ban any public bodies conducting their investments and procurement “in a way that indicates political or moral disapproval of a foreign state.”
An accompanying press release made clear the legislation’s explicit purpose was protecting “businesses and organizations” affiliated with Israel. Michael Gove, the then-government minister who introduced the law, said of BDS efforts:
“These campaigns not only undermine the UK’s foreign policy but lead to appalling antisemitic rhetoric and abuse. That is why we have taken this decisive action to stop these disruptive policies once and for all.”
The array of organizations affected is gargantuan, ranging from local councils to universities, and the implications are grave in every way. Institutions can be investigated solely at the personal discretion of government officials and face voluminous fines for breaches. During the 1980s, when the British government refused to sanction or condemn South Africa, the very entities targeted by this legislation boycotted the Apartheid state. If the new law were in effect at the time, such activities would have been entirely illegal.
Exacerbating matters further, the anti-BDS Act violates multiple UN rulings and contradicts the British government’s own stated positions. London’s official stance for decades has been that Israeli settlements “are illegal under international law, constitute an obstacle to peace and threaten a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.” As such, Britain’s private sector is actively discouraged by authorities from conducting business there. Yet, public bodies may now be legally prohibited from following this very precept.
Still, there remains one potential legal avenue of resistance. As MintPress News has previously reported, multiple legal findings and precedents indicate countries party to the Genocide Convention, as Britain is, must “employ all means reasonably available” to prevent genocide. What’s more, failing to stop providing aid or assistance to a state engaged in genocide could violate Article I of the Convention. This could provide legal protection from London’s new anti-BDS law. As activist Naila Kauser, herself a target of London’s latest measures, concludes:
“Laws that defend genocide have no legitimacy, and states enforcing them and enabling the genocide have no moral authority. They want us to shut up, but we must continue to resist these attacks, as well as the ongoing genocide, in any way we can until Palestine is liberated.”
Germany’s AfD party is declared ‘definitely right-wing extremist’ by BfV spy agency, paving the way for a ban
Remix News | May 2, 2025
The Alternative for Germany (AfD) party has been declared “definitely right-wing extremist,” by the powerful domestic spy agency, the Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV). The party is reacting with outrage.
The BfV claims that the party is pursuing efforts against the “free democratic order,” which the agency now says is “certain.”
Previously, the party was only declared as a “suspected case,” with this new designation paving the way for not only a ban but also mass surveillance of the entire party, including all its members. With this new designation, the BfV can surveil members, including their emails, phone calls, and chats, without a warrant. In addition, the BfV can now legally infiltrate the entire party with informants and use other spy techniques.
Already, other parts of the AfD at the state level were classified as “definitely right-wing extremist,” but the new designation now applies this label to the entire national party.
The party is reacting with outrage, with Alice Weidel, the co-leader of the party, writing:
“The decision of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution is a severe blow to German democracy!”
Regarding the statement by the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, AfD federal spokespersons Alice Weidel and Tino Chrupalla said:
Today’s decision by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution is a severe blow to German democracy: In current polls, the AfD is the strongest force. The federal government only has four days left in office, the intelligence agency doesn’t even have a president anymore. And the classification as a so-called suspected case is not yet legally binding.
Nevertheless, the AfD, as an opposition party, is now being publicly discredited and criminalized shortly before the change of government. The associated, targeted interference in the democratic decision-making process is therefore clearly politically motivated. The AfD will continue to defend itself legally against these defamations that endanger democracy.”
The BfV, however, is attempting to justify its decision, which will be seen by many as an attack on the country’s largest opposition party.
Due to the “extremist character of the entire party, which disregards human dignity,” the BfV noted in its statement. Vice presidents of the authority, Sinan Selen and Silke Willems, further indicated that statements and positions of the party “violate the principle of human dignity.”
One of the key factors that the BfV is attempting to use to justify the designation is the AfD’s alleged position on “ethnic Germans.”
“The ethnic-descendant understanding of the people prevailing in the party is not compatible with the free democratic basic order,” reads the statement from the BfV. “The AfD, for example, does not consider German citizens with a migration history from predominantly Muslim countries to be equal members of the German people, as ethnically defined by the party.”
The BfV, which has been led by a Christian Democrat for years who was rabidly opposed to the AfD, a rival party, further writes: “The BfV reached this conclusion after an intensive and comprehensive expert review. Following its statutory mandate, the BfV was required to assess the party’s actions against the central fundamental principles of the constitution: human dignity, the principle of democracy, and the rule of law. In doing so, in addition to the federal party’s platform and statements, the statements and other behavior of its representatives, as well as their connections to right-wing extremist actors and groups, were examined in particular.”
The BfV is no longer led by Thomas Haldenwang (CDU), but here he is discussing the AfD during his tenure. Haldenwang gave up his position to run as an MP but he lost his seat.
The news comes at a time when the AfD is the number one party in the country, according to national polls, a position it has achieved for the first time. As the party surges, its democratic rivals are becoming increasingly concerned, prompting calls for a ban from not only the left, but also the traditional “center-right,” which has shifted more and more to the left over the years.
Ban procedure can now move forward
The latest designation was a key plan in the move to ban the party, with many so-called “moderates” waiting for the BfV designation to move forward with a vote to ban the party.
However, there is no sign yet of how a ban will move forward, with many in the CDU skeptical about banning the most popular party in the country, along with some from the left as well.
Previous attempts to ban the far-right NPD, which took some notably extremist stances, were unsuccessful, with the top court arguing that the party was not large enough to represent a serious threat to the democratic order. There were also questions about the excessive number of informants, making it difficult to ascertain how much of the extremism in the party was due to informants versus the party’s own members.
However, the AfD, in contrast, is not only popular but is now the most popular party in the country.
Emil Sänze, the AfD leader in the state association of AfD leader Alice Weidel, said this was a deliberate attempt to weaken the largest opposition party. He told Bild, “This is outrageous. A purely political decision in the run-up to the chancellor election on May 6.”
Hamas: Switzerland’s ban on the Movement is biased against Palestinian people, resistance
Palestinian Information Center – May 1, 2025
OCCUPIED JERUSALEM – The Islamic Resistance Movement, Hamas, considered Switzerland’s decision to enact a ban on the Movement as a reprehensible bias against the Palestinian people, their just cause, and legitimate resistance against the occupation, especially in light of the war of genocide in the Gaza Strip.
In a statement on Thursday, Hamas said, “The Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) regrets that the move to ban the Movement comes from a country historically known for its neutrality and defense of international humanitarian law.”
It stressed that the political, humanitarian and moral obligations of the international community, foremost among them Switzerland, require urgent action to stop the flagrant violations of international law, including the Geneva Conventions, rather than tightening the noose on the Palestinian people.
Hamas stated that the “terrorist Netanyahu government” violates international commitments and agreements on a daily basis, denouncing “the imposition of laws that restrict freedoms and stifle any pressure to stop the ongoing massacres in the Gaza Strip.”
Hamas called on the Swiss government to reverse this “unjust” and unjustified decision, to side with justice, and to support the legitimate struggle of the Palestinian people to end the occupation and achieve their legitimate national rights.
On Wednesday, the Swiss government announced its intention to enforce a ban on Hamas and affiliated groups, starting from May 15.
This move follows a similar measure in neighboring Germany, which banned Hamas less than a month after the genocide had been launched by Israel on October 7, 2023.
The Swiss ban prohibits all activities and support for Hamas and allows the authorities to impose entry bans and expulsions from the country. Officials said the measure also aims to prevent Hamas from using Switzerland as a financial center.
The Russians Are Coming!
By Hans Vogel | April 24, 2025
Thirty years after the end of the Cold War, European elites are shouting once again that the Russians are coming. Why would they bother invading European NATO states when everything that makes life possible in Europe is collapsing?
“The Russians can be here at any moment! The Russians have a huge army, ready to invade. We need to be prepared to fight and resist them, because if we don’t, they will destroy our country and kill our families!” That is what our lieutenant used to tell us in the 1970s during military service. I was then stationed somewhere between Bremen and Hamburg in the North German plains. Both cities had been flattened during the Second World War. Not by the Russians, but mostly by the English, our NATO ally. Yet we were constantly being reminded by the officers, noncoms and military and state propaganda that the Russians would do exactly the same and worse. The Russians, always the Russians! At that very moment, the Americans, our NATO bosses, were still busy destroying Vietnam, but that seemed to bother nobody.
“If the Russians are truly so superior as you say they are, why aren’t they here yet?” I asked the Lieutenant.
One day we were taken to the nearby exercise grounds to learn how to deal with a nuclear attack. We heard an explosion and saw a convincing mushroom cloud in the distance. “That is a tactical nuclear bomb,” we were told as we were instructed to put on an olive-drab handkerchief as a face mask so as not to breath “radioactive particles.” Then we were given little brushes to take the “radioactive dust” off our battle dresses. I asked the officers if this would not bring more of those particles into the air we were breathing. Nope, it was protocol, was the answer. At any rate, I thought this entire procedure was so amateurish as to be absolutely ridiculous. Then and there I stopped believing in the existence of nuclear bombs. Why would the Russians use tactical nuclear bombs if they wanted to conquer and occupy Western Europe, as was being claimed? Wouldn’t they make the conquered territory uninhabitable for themselves?
The “Russians” (which then was used to indicate the inhabitants of the Soviet Union) were always depicted in the darkest hues (which in those days still was considered unfavorable, even by the politically correct), and with idiotic exaggeration. So much so that, in a dialectical reaction, many of us soldiers were inclined to think those Russians were actually really nice guys. Such can be the unexpected result of fanatical propaganda, when the narrative is just too one-sided and unrealistic. It will eventually produce the opposite of what the authorities and their presstitutes want.
Most soldiers could not care less. The propaganda would enter through one ear, only to leave right away through the other. Each night, they would enjoy their beers, brag about their girlfriends and watch a movie in the 2,000 seat barracks theater. Those movies came basically in two varieties: documentaries on African wildlife, with giraffes and lions parading across the screen, and third-rate action movies from Israel, in which grinning zionist fighters would engage in bloody massacres of Arabs. It was the worst imaginable pornography of violence.
In the end, the Russians never showed up. Nor did they ever plan to come and visit us. A few years later between 1989 and 1991 the Soviet Union collapsed and the Berlin Wall came down. To the surprise of many, however, NATO was not dissolved. Quite the contrary: many new states were welcomed as NATO members. Yet the Russian “danger” was no longer there. As the remnants of the Soviet Union were cannibalized by Western capitalist raiders and looters, it was obvious there was no longer any Russian threat.
For a brief period, Western elites had a hard time identifying other imaginary dangers with which to keep the citizens subdued. Still during the “Cold War” they came up with acid rain, but it did not quite do the trick. The anthropogenic climate change narrative needed further elaboration. In 1992 the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change laid the groundwork for this, strengthened by the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. The 2006 documentary An Inconvenient Truth, promoted worldwide was a small step for Al Gore, but a big step for the Climate mafia. Clamors by the UN and NGOs demanding sacrifices from the public in order to “save the planet” were becoming ever more obnoxious.
Meanwhile in 2001 after the demolition of three WTC towers in New York City, the US government and its vassals asserted that Arabic and Islamic terrorism were so absolutely terrifying that henceforth all airline passengers worldwide were to be subjected to ridiculous and humiliating security checks. Mind you, it was decided not just to check Arabs or muslims (that would be discrimination!), but ALL passengers, including babies and small children.
Anthropogenic climate change soon replaced the terrorism scare and became the core of official scare mongering. Nevertheless, all those “climate scientists” agreeing that climate change was caused by human activity and trying to convince us that the weather gods needed to be pacified by all sorts of sacrifices, somehow did not convince most of us. The speech that Greta Thunberg gave in the UN in July 2019 was the best speech to the UN General Assembly ever given by a 16-year old autistic girl, but it failed as it did not bring about the expected universal clamor for sacrifices to the weather gods.
Right then, at the end of 2019 the Great Covid Show was launched. Without doubt this was the most successful fear campaign ever, benefiting from the vast reservoir of knowledge gleaned from the MK Ultra program. Billions of people, believing the official narrative and naively trusting their governments and the assembled presstitutes, duly took the “vaccinations” that were pushed in all corners of the planet.
As the Great Covid Show proceeded, which was actually a US Deep State and WHO-sponsored holocaust in entire nations that were turned into “extermination camps,” Vladimir Putin launched the Special Military Operation against the Ukraine. Since this was a US neo-colony (just like Cuba was from 1902 to 1959), howls of indignant protest were heard all over the West. Western state media and presstitutes duly enhanced and increased the volume of the howling and wailing to deafening levels.
“You can’t just invade another country!” a friend of mine with whom I studied history told me. “Sure you can,” I answered, “that is what NATO did in Yugoslavia, and the US in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria. That is what Turkey did in Cyprus in 1980, Morocco in 1975 invading the Sahara. And what about Israel always invading and harassing its neighbors since 1948? That was all fine and dandy. Why would Russia not be allowed to invade the Ukraine?” My friend could not see the logic, but reluctantly shut up, since he had no arguments.
Now that the Ukraine, together with its Western overlords, is facing final defeat, the old myth of an imminent Russian invasion has been dusted off. Putin is the “New Hitler” of the moment while Russia is allegedly the reincarnation of the former Soviet Union.
NATO’s hermaphrodite-in-chief, cabinet ministers of NATO member states, an entire armchair army of “experts” and all the state media and presstitutes in the West are repeating constantly that the Russians are coming and that we must all prepare for a war that will come inevitably. They are all repeating what our Lieutenant used to say during the Cold War: “The Russians can be here at any moment! The Russians have a huge army, ready to invade. We need to be prepared to fight and resist them, because if we don’t, they will destroy our country and kill our families!”
Yeah, right!
Ukrainian envoy asks for 30% of Germany’s military equipment
RT | April 20, 2025
Germany should donate 30% of its available armored vehicles and military aircraft to Kiev, according to Andrey Melnik, Ukraine’s envoy to the UN. His appeal comes as EU nations seek ways to boost support amid uncertainty over whether US President Donald Trump would continue backing Ukraine.
Melnik, who served as ambassador to Berlin from 2015 to 2022, addressed his plea in an open letter to Chancellor-designate Friedrich Merz, published in Welt am Sonntag on Saturday. “It is in your hands, as peacemakers, to stop this damn war by the end of 2025,” he wrote.
The diplomat outlined a series of steps he believes Merz must take to “cut the Gordian knot and force [Russian President Vladimir] Putin to make peace.”
According to Melnik, Germany should donate 30% of its Bundeswehr stock of armored vehicles and aircraft to Kiev, including around 45 Eurofighter Typhoon and 30 Tornado fighter jets, 100 Leopard 2 main battle tanks, and 115 Puma and 130 Marder infantry fighting vehicles. He also called on Berlin to defy “the expected resistance” from the Social Democrats (SPD) and send 150 Taurus cruise missiles.
The SPD has opposed the missile deliveries, citing concerns about further escalation with Russia. The Social Democrats and Merz’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU) are currently engaged in coalition talks.
Melnik urged Germany to commit 0.5% of its GDP – or €21.5 billion ($24.5 billion) annually – toward military aid to Ukraine through 2029. “These funds should be invested in the production of state-of-the-art weapons in both Germany and Ukraine,” he wrote. He also called for the 0.5% benchmark to be adopted across the EU as a “huge warning signal” to Russia.
Merz recently expressed openness to delivering Taurus missiles, prompting criticism from SPD leader Matthias Miersch and Defense Minister Boris Pistorius. Meanwhile, Russian Ambassador to Germany Sergey Nechayev warned that such shipments would “bring no changes to the battlefield” but would further implicate Germany in the conflict.
Germany announces new military aid package to Ukraine
RT | April 20, 2025
Germany has announced a new package of military aid for Ukraine, which includes armored vehicles, air-defense rockets, and howitzers, among other weaponry. Earlier this month, incoming Chancellor Friedrich Merz indicated that he might break Berlin’s self-imposed taboo on providing Kiev with long-range rockets – a remark that drew a stern warning from Moscow.
On Thursday, the German government published an updated list of arms and military equipment it shipped to Ukraine. The latest batch encompasses a number of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles (MRAP), ammunition for Leopard 2 tanks as well as Gepard self-propelled anti-aircraft guns and missiles for IRIS-T SLM air-defense systems. On top of that, Berlin supplied Kiev with several Zuzana 2 self-propelled howitzers, 155mm and 122mm artillery rounds, reconnaissance and strike drones, as well as man-portable anti-tank weapons and assault rifles.
According to the statement, “in total, the Federal Republic of Germany has so far provided or committed for future years military assistance with a value of approximately 28 billion euro,” with around €5.2 billion ($5.9 billion) worth of supplies coming from the German military’s own stocks.
Additionally, “more than 10,000 Ukrainian soldiers have received military training in Germany” since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022, Berlin estimated.
At a meeting of the Ukraine Contact Group in Brussels, German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius announced plans to donate military equipment to Ukraine in 2025. The donation will include four IRIS-T air defense systems, 300 guided missiles, 100 ground surveillance radars, 100,000 artillery rounds, 300 reconnaissance drones, 25 Marder infantry fighting vehicles, 15 Leopard 1A5 tanks, and 120 portable anti-aircraft missile systems.
Speaking to outlet ARD last Sunday, Merz, who is expected to be officially named chancellor on May 6, hinted that he could deliver Taurus missiles to Ukraine. The Taurus has a range of 500km.
Current Chancellor Olaf Scholz has repeatedly turned down Kiev’s requests for the rockets, arguing that they could lead to a dangerous escalation of the conflict.
Matthias Miersch, the leader of the Social Democratic Party (SPD), which is currently in the process of forming a coalition government with Merz’s Christian Democrats, expressed hope on Wednesday that the incoming chancellor, “once fully informed by [intelligence] agencies, will reassess the issue clearly.”
In response to Merz’s remark, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova stated that any cruise missile attack on Russian facilities or critical transport infrastructure requiring Bundeswehr assistance would be seen as direct German involvement in military operations.
Facing Prison Time in Germany for Criticizing an Israeli Journalist: The Case of Hüseyin Dogru
By Alan MacLeod – MintPressNews – April 20, 2025
Amid a crackdown on pro-Palestine voices in Germany, a journalist regularly attacked as a Russian operative is facing up to three years in prison for defamation of an Israel-based journalist. Hüseyin Dogru, founder of red. media, has been charged with defamation for actions relating to a spat with Nicholas Potter, a German state-funded reporter working for the Israeli outlet, The Jerusalem Post.
In December, Potter, a self-styled counter-extremism expert, published a lengthy exposé in The Jerusalem Post, claiming that red. media, MintPress News, and The Grayzone were part of a network of far-left outlets promoting extremism and anti-Semitic conspiracy theories.
Worse still, he strongly insinuated that all three were promoted and funded by the governments of Russia, Syria, and Iran.
The charges are false (see MintPress’ rebuttal here), and are particularly ironic, coming as they do from a journalist who is funded by the German Foreign Office. One who, amid a genocide, moved to Israel to work for an outlet headed by a former Israeli Defense Forces spokesperson.
Moreover, Potter himself arguably holds extreme views on the subject. Just weeks after attacking us for our journalism, he penned an article titled “Can Journalists Be Terrorists,” which attempted to justify many of Israel’s killings of Palestinian media workers.
Both red. and MintPress immediately highlighted much of this important context, and our content went viral.
From Viral Criticism to Criminal Charges
A sticker about Potter, based on a red. media graphic, was spotted in Berlin. The sticker took the outlet’s criticism of him, and plastered the phrase, “The German Hurensohn” — “The German Son of a Bitch” — over the top. That sticker is the centerpiece of the prosecution’s allegation of a coordinated “hate campaign” against Potter led by red. media. Potter claims that he has suffered harassment and threats to his life, and some have tried to link this back to red. media’s graphic.
The accusations provoked a storm of articles in German media, all supportive of Potter. Many echoed U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s claims that red. media is a Russian government-controlled influence operation.

A red. media post criticizing journalist Nicholas Potter, left, appears as a modified sticker in Germany, right. Photo provided to MintPress
Dogru denies these allegations, although he was previously a key part of Red Fish, a platform financed by Ruptly, a Germany-based outlet partially funded by the Russian state-controlled network, RT. After the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Dogru closed Red Fish and started his own independent outlet. He insists it has no connection to Russia and is dedicated to making revolutionary and educational content. He also denies having any information or involvement in producing anti-Potter stickers.
Germany Criminalized Palestinian Solidarity
Potter’s support for Israeli policies has certainly drawn the ire of many in the pro-Palestine movement in Germany. Yet he is far from alone. The German government has offered its full support to Israel and has gone so far as to ban pro-Palestine demonstrations and lock up countless activists, including Jewish people. The phrase “From the River to the Sea” has effectively been criminalized, with Berlin announcing that it would deny citizenship to anyone using it. New German citizenship laws require all applicants to sign what is, in effect, a loyalty oath to the State of Israel, declaring that it has a “right to exist.”
Berlin is currently deporting foreign residents for their participation in lawful protests supporting Palestinian rights. Dogru’s legal team has advised him that his wife and son could be deported as well.
Commentators have warned that, with these actions, Germany is lurching towards the authoritarian right. With the far-right AfD Party surging in the polls (a recent survey found they are now the most popular party in Germany), many inside the country are ringing the alarm bells.
“For decades, Germany has stuck with Israel and its narratives in the Middle East,” Dogru told MintPress, adding: “Since October 7, we see that the German government is violently repressing activists to make sure there are no voices in Germany critical of Israel. Activists here have paid a high price to make sure that they can protest.”
According to Dogru, this is a test case. Ultimately, the suppression of speech is not about Israel, but an attack on its own society.
Germany is preparing to assert itself as a leading military and political force in NATO and the EU. To do that, it must eliminate resistance — not just abroad, but at home. This isn’t driven by historical guilt or solidarity. It’s about silencing dissent and disciplining society. By targeting the most marginalized, the German state is disciplining its population — silencing opposition before it grows.”
The message from the German government is clear, Dogru claims: “fall in line, or be crushed.”
US proposes leaving former Ukrainian territories under Russian control – Bloomberg
RT | April 18, 2025
The US has presented its allies with the details of its peace plan to bring the conflict between Russia and Ukraine to an end, Bloomberg reported on Friday, citing European officials familiar with the matter.
The contours of the plan were outlined during a meeting in Paris on Thursday. The proposal reportedly includes easing sanctions on Russia, as well as terminating Ukraine’s aspirations to join NATO. The roadmap would effectively freeze the war, with the formerly Ukrainian territories held by Russia remaining under Moscow’s control, the sources suggested.
One of the officials told Bloomberg that the proposal still had to be discussed with Kiev, adding that the plan would not actually amount to a definitive settlement of the conflict. Moreover, Kiev’s European backers would not recognize the territories as Russian, the source suggested.
The Paris meetings involved senior officials from several countries. The US delegation was led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and White House special envoy Steve Witkoff. They met with French President Emmanuel Macron and also held discussions with top officials and negotiators from France, Germany, the UK, and Ukraine.
Earlier on Friday, Rubio signaled Washington was ready to “move on” if a way to end the hostilities between Moscow and Kiev could not be found shortly.
“We need to figure out here now, within a matter of days, whether this is doable in the short term. Because if it’s not, then I think we’re just going to move on,” Rubio told reporters before departing from France.
Moscow has signaled a full ceasefire with Ukraine was highly unlikely, citing Kiev’s violations of previous deals. Speaking to reporters at the UN headquarters on Thursday, Russian envoy Vassily Nebenzia said there are “big issues with the comprehensive ceasefire,” recalling the fate of the now-defunct Minsk agreements, which were “misused and abused to prepare Ukraine for the confrontation.”
The diplomat also cited repeated Ukrainian violations of a US-brokered 30-day moratorium on energy infrastructure strikes, implemented on March 18.
“How close we are to the ceasefire is a big question to me personally, because, as I said, we had an attempt at a limited ceasefire on energy infrastructure, which was not observed by the Ukrainian side. So, in these circumstances, to speak about a ceasefire is simply unrealistic at this stage,” Nebenzia said.
Germany: Far-left extremist on trial for attempted murder wins state-sponsored €30,000 art prize

By Thomas Brooke | Remix News | April 15, 2025
Hanna Schiller, a German art student charged with attempted murder and membership of the notorious far-left “Hammer Gang,” has been awarded the 27th Federal Prize for Art Students — a prestigious state-sponsored honor carrying €30,000 in prize money and additional production support.
Schiller has been in pre-trial detention since May 2024 and has been formally charged for her role in violent assaults carried out by the Antifa-affiliated gang, including in Budapest, where the gang severely beat nine people they suspected of being right-wing back in 2023.
The indictment states Schiller and others pinned one of the victims down during the attack while others beat him unconscious with a baton, which prosecutors say could have resulted in death.
Despite these charges, Schiller was nominated by the Academy of Fine Arts Nuremberg, where she remains a registered student. The nomination came months after her arrest and appears to have been made in full knowledge of the legal proceedings.
The prize is ultimately awarded by the Federal Ministry of Education and the German Students’ Union after assessing nominations from respective institutions.
As reported by Tichys Einblick, the prize jury praised Schiller’s work for its “precise political images” and its focus on “structural violence and power,” referencing pieces made from women’s hair as examples of her exploration of contemporary sociopolitical issues. The official announcement made no mention of the charges or her imprisonment.
Academy officials have defended the nomination, citing a commitment to the principle of presumption of innocence. “The AdBK Nuremberg treats her like any other student until the verdict is announced,” the school said in a written response to inquiries.
The academy does, however, state in its mission statement that it is “for openness, tolerance and against any kind of extremism and violence.”
Still, critics say the award signals an unacceptable tolerance for violent extremism, pointing to Schiller’s alleged crimes, which include premeditated assaults using hammers and pepper spray. The gang’s targets were reportedly individuals believed to be right-wing, whom they ambushed and beat without warning. Prosecutors say Schiller was directly involved in restraining and attacking several victims during the assaults, one of whom received over 15 blows to the head.
Other members of the gang have already been convicted. Lina Engel was sentenced to five years and three months in prison by a Dresden court back in June 2023, while three of her associates received lesser sentences. Another member was sentenced to three years in a Hungarian prison the following January.
After years on the run, Johann Guntermann, the 31-year-old suspected head of the extremist group, was arrested by German police after being apprehended near Leipzig in November last year.
In addition to the €30,000 prize money, Schiller also received a scholarship of €18,000 to fund an art exhibition scheduled to open in November at the exhibition planned from November 2025 at the Bundeskunsthalle in Bonn.
Commenting on the news, Alternative for Germany (AfD) co-leader Alice Weidel claimed Schiller’s violent activism may have actually been a key reason for her receiving the award.
“Left-wing extremist Hanna S., allegedly part of the ‘Hammer Gang,’ receives a state-sponsored art prize worth 30,000 euros, possibly not despite, but precisely because of, her ‘activism.” No taxpayer money for violent left-wing extremism!” Weidel wrote on X.
With the trial ongoing in Munich, the Ministry of Education and the Nuremberg Academy have yet to revise their position or address the appropriateness of awarding a national prize to an individual currently facing charges for attempted murder and violent extremism.
It is unclear whether the prize and subsequent funds will be revoked pending a conviction.
AfD leader slams latest German military aid to Kiev as ‘catastrophic’
Al Mayadeen | April 11, 2025
Germany’s plan to ramp up military support for Ukraine has drawn sharp criticism from Alice Weidel, co-leader of the right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) party. Speaking on Friday, Weidel condemned Defense Minister Boris Pistorius’ announcement of further arms deliveries, warning that the move fuels conflict rather than advancing peace.
According to a report by RedaktionsNetzwerk Deutschland (RND), Pistorius revealed that Berlin will allocate an additional 8 billion euros ($9 billion) in military assistance to Ukraine by 2029. This comes on top of roughly 7 billion euros worth of equipment pledged for delivery in 2025. Germany has already committed nearly €44 billion in aid to Ukraine since the war began in 2022, including military, financial, and humanitarian support, making it one of Kiev’s largest backers in Europe.
Responding to the announcement on social media platform X, Weidel said: “Pistorius announces new arms deliveries to Ukraine. This makes it clear: the small coalition continues the catastrophic course of escalation carried out by the ‘traffic light’ coalition. This is explosive. We must support the US efforts to achieve a ceasefire.”
Weidel and the AfD have long opposed German military aid to Ukraine, arguing that continued arms shipments escalate tensions and jeopardize German national interests. She has also criticized sanctions on Russia, warning they disproportionately harm Germany’s economy. In her public statements, Weidel has urged Berlin to adopt a neutral foreign policy stance and support diplomatic initiatives, particularly those backed by US President Donald Trump.
Russian officials have frequently argued that Western weapon supplies prolong the war and position NATO countries as active participants in the conflict. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov reiterated that any shipment containing arms intended for Ukraine is considered a valid military target under Russian policy.
Here’s why the AfD is destined for the German government
By Tarik Cyril Amar | RT | April 12, 2025
Germany has an undeserved reputation for dour rationality and lacking an appreciation of the absurd. In reality, however, Germany is a – for want of nicer terms – very counterintuitive country.
If you are running a regime in Kiev (at least according to the official story) and blow up Germany’s vital energy infrastructure, Germans will say thank you and throw money and arms at you, while also helping you blame someone else (the Russians, of course: Germany has never been an imaginative country).
If you are in Washington and certainly had a hand in blowing up that infrastructure, and then go on to fleece the Germans by selling LNG at a high cost and promoting their deindustrialization by filching their companies, good Germans get very, very angry – at China.
If you happen to be the single most popular and perfectly legal political party in Germany, get ready to never be allowed to actually participate in governing. Because Germany is also a country in which that single most popular party – the Alternative for Germany (Alternative für Deutschland, commonly known simply as AfD) – is locked out of building governing coalitions. By definition.
That system is called a “firewall” – against that nasty most popular party that makes life so difficult for all those other, no longer popular parties. It has absolutely no basis in the constitution or in law.
Come to think of it, as the “firewall” systematically and deliberately treats the votes of AfD voters as somehow less effective than those of others, it may well be the “firewall” itself that is unconstitutional, at least in spirit if not even by the letter of the law. So much for Germany, the country that allegedly loves order and rules.
In reality, the “firewall” amounts to a dirty political cartel and a form of disenfranchisement: The traditional parties, feeling threatened by the insurgent AfD have simply decided that they do not care what the voters say and won’t have anything to do with it. Since German governments are virtually always based on coalitions, which means that the AfD and its voters are treated as inferior. That this means that, as of now, in particular voters in the former East Germany are subject to this kind of discrimination, adding a West-East aspect to it that sits very badly with talk about German unity.
To get one thing out of the way: For now, it is only one poll that shows the AfD in the lead; other polls still have it in (barely) second place after the mainstream conservatives of the CDU/CSU bloc (which, in reality, functions as one party) of soon-to-be chancellor Friedrich Merz. But these differences are irrelevant. What matters is that the AfD’s rising trend is unbroken. That is definitely a blow to Merz, even before he has officially assumed office, as international observers are noting. Especially in view of the fact that Merz’s own poll numbers are cratering at the same time.
Yet there is a broader point, too: The whole “firewall” strategy is malfunctioning extremely badly. Sensible observers have long predicted it, and now it is becoming ever more obvious: Freezing the AfD out only serves to make it stronger.
One thing that does not make Berlin’s ruling parties, the CDU and SPD, any more popular is that they have concluded their negotiations on how to divvy up the spoils of ministries and other goodies. Indeed, it is extremely embarrassing for the new governing coalition of conservatives and Social-Democrats (SPD) that the most recent AfD milestone breakthrough is happening now. It is a coincidence from hell: there they are, the traditional parties, seemingly safe behind their “firewall” and all ready to go, and the voters – uncouth as they can be – show them just how unpopular they are.
Germans expect little from them, even now: A fresh poll shows that two thirds do not believe that things will change under the new coalition of tired old parties.
Note that most Germans have been deeply unhappy with the status quo, as we also know from recent polls: In February, Ipsos found that the general mood was “as bad as never before.” Only 17 percent of citizens – less than a fifth – believed their country was “on a good trajectory.” The other 83 percent were not indifferent or neutral but felt Germany was on the “wrong” trajectory. Even for a nation with something of a culture of angst and doom, those are atrocious figures.
Hence, expecting no change now amounts to deep pessimism: Germans have felt for a while already that they are in dire trouble; and a preponderant majority thinks that that is where they will be stuck under new old management as well.
A senior AfD leader, Alexander Gauland, is already more than confident: “It’s a natural law that we’ll be ahead of the CDU at the next elections,” he recently declared. That may be jinxing it. The AfD is, after all, much less unlike other parties than the latter like to pretend: The AfD as well may end up squandering its current good luck with infighting, for instance, over how to react to US President Donald Trump’s tariff attacks, which will severely harm Germany.
Yet there is no doubt that the traditional parties are doing their utmost to repel not only voters but even their own members. In particular Merz’s CDU is in barely contained rebellion: its members and voters are fuming at having voted conservative and yet being saddled with a massive deficit spending program. The pretext that all of this is needed because of – drum roll – Big Bad Russia is not dampening down the anger.
One local CDU organization has already rebelled openly. In the state of Sachsen-Anhalt, formerly part of East Germany, CDU members from the Harz district have gone public with an official resolution making two points and one demand: There is “massive” unrest among the CDU’s base of ordinary party members, and in Germany’s “East,” that is, what used to be the former German Democratic Republic, the CDU has decisively lost the last federal elections. The demand is to tear down the so-called “firewall” against the AfD and start collaborating with it systematically. It is symptomatic that this very local rebellion is making news all over the country.
“What a scandal! Opening the gates to the far right!” many will scream. Yet they have it all upside down: Disregarding the fact that, in reality, the CDU/CSU conservatives and the AfD mostly see eye-to-eye ideologically, one day, in the not so far away future, the AfD may well enter and perhaps even dominate a German government. The irony is that when that happens, those who have upheld the, frankly, moronic “firewall” will have only themselves to blame. Because the real question is not if the AfD will enter government in Berlin but how and, in particular, how strong. The longer the “firewall” is kept up, the more likely the AfD will not just participate but dominate.
Tarik Cyril Amar, a historian from Germany working at Koç University, Istanbul, on Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe, the history of World War II, the cultural Cold War, and the politics of memory

