House Resolution Calls for Tech Companies to Censor Speech
Legislation introduced by two AIPAC funded representatives
By Kurt Nimmo | Another Day in the Empire | May 2, 2026
This one slipped under the wire. Tucker Carlson talked about it the other day, but beyond that, it is flying sans transponder. On February 29, New Jersey Democrat Josh Gottheimer and New York Republican Mike Lawler introduced “a bipartisan resolution condemning the rise of antisemitic, hate-filled rhetoric disseminated by prominent online personalities, including Hasan Piker and Candace Owens, and calling on social media platforms and public leaders to take stronger action against hate,” according to Gottheimer’s taxpayer funded website.
Watch at Rumble
“The resolution highlights the growing influence of online personalities and the alarming surge in antisemitism driven, in part, by disinformation and extremist rhetoric… When influential voices spread conspiracy theories, promote terrorism, or dehumanize Jewish people, it fuels real-world violence and intimidation. We must stand up and speak out.”
Owens, Gottheimer’s post continues, “has trafficked in vile conspiracy theories, promoted blood libels, and platformed Holocaust deniers,” and Piker has “dehumanized Orthodox Jews” The post continues with debunked lies concerning the Hamas al-Aqsa Flood open-air prison breakout on October 7, 2023.
Lawler received $1,069,875 and Gottheimer $2,062,601 from the Israel lobby. Both are essentially paid operatives for the Likud government of Israel. Furthermore, both “representatives” are traitors to the the Bill of Rights and have violated their oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
The Democrat Gottheimer, sounding like a staunch MAGA Republican, declared the “relationship with Israel is key to our national security. Terrorists hate the United States more than they hate Israel.” Lawler voted for a budget “that cut Medicaid and raised the cost of healthcare for millions of Americans, while saying US taxpayer funding for Israel should be ‘unconditional’ and voted for over $18 billion in weapons to Israel in 2024,” thus revealing his priorities (and making sure AIPAC sweetens his pot for the next election).
Last August, Israeli PM Netanyahu directly inserted himself in domestic American politics by demanding “the algorithms and the social networks” be censored to eliminate criticism of Israel.
In April, Zionist podcaster and self-proclaimed constitutionalist Mark Levin denounced critics of Israeli apartheid and genocide as “Nazis” and “jihadis” and said they are “inciting” violence with their speech. He argued the freedom of speech, once considered god-given and natural in America, is “overprotected.” Carlson said “Mark Levin, the right wing MAGA guy, is saying those people [critics of Israel] should be silenced by the tech companies.”
Another podcaster, Ben Shapiro, told the Palm Beach Gardens Chabad synagogue that X is an “unusable” and “vile stream of trash.” He admitted reaching out “to Elon’s people about” the criticism of Zionism he considers contemptible. “The algorithms are destroying America,” he said.
“We will monitor social media, and check your bank accounts,” Jonathan Greenblatt, the leader of the ADL, threatened in January. He said the ADL “shares the information with the FBI” gathered on anti-Zionist “extremists.” In June, he demanded companies “knock the anti-Zionists off the platform once and for all.” Research from the ADL’s Center for Technology and Society posted to X “shows that five major platforms are still failing to enforce” the removal of content critical of Israel and Zionists.
Israel-born Chabadnik Rabbi Yehuda Kaploun, Trump’s czar of antisemitism, announced in December the State Department will establish a “whole division” to combat criticism of Israel and is working to develop social media algorithms that exclude “misinformation.”
“From YouTube to X, Wikipedia, and TikTok, Zionists are capturing all means of communication to erase the evidence of its genocide, reshape the historical record, and censor those critical of it,” writes Robert Inlakesh for the Palestine Chronicle. “Those who are critical of Israel are being censored or arrested.”
Tucker Carlson warns full-blown censorship will soon arrive in America through legislation forcing technology corporations to remove content deemed antisemitic by Israel and Zionists in America. “Criticizing the behavior of a foreign government is a hate crime and can get you censored in your own country,” he said.
So what’s the takeaway from all this? Well, the first takeaway is censorship is coming, and it will work unless people exercise their God-given and First Amendment-guaranteed right to push back against it with words and do so at high volume without any shame at all. It’s going to need a refusal to be intimidated by false claims of, quote, hate.
Pirates of Mediterranean: Israel does as it pleases in the Sea of Three Continents
By Lorenzo Maria Pacini | Strategic Culture Foundation | May 1, 2026
How control of the Mediterranean works
On the night of April 29–30, the Zionist entity Israel attacked the 22 ships of the Global Sumud Flotilla 600 kilometers off the Italian coast, from where the group had set sail. All of this took place unhindered, constituting yet another act of bullying, piracy, and barbarism. But how does the Mediterranean work?
The Mediterranean, often referred to as “Mare Nostrum” in European political culture, is one of the most complex maritime theaters in the world: a crossroads of trade routes, a setting for migration crises, regional conflicts, and the strategic interests of major powers. The management of international waters, military control of shipping lanes, and initiatives by civilian vessels such as the Global Sumud Flotilla constitute three facets of the same dynamic: the attempt to regulate and control the use of the sea in the name of state interests, security, and humanitarian solidarity.
The basic legal framework for the management of international waters is the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), adopted in 1982 and in force since 1994, which regulates the mapping, use, and responsibilities of states regarding various maritime zones. In the Mediterranean, which is a nearly enclosed sea, this convention applies in a particular way, because the distance between the coasts is often less than 400 nautical miles—that is, the sum of the maximum EEZs of two opposing states.
The main zones recognized by UNCLOS are: the territorial sea (up to 12 miles from the baseline), where the coastal state has full sovereignty but is obligated to guarantee “innocent passage” to foreign vessels; the contiguous zone (up to 24 miles), with limited control for customs, tax, health, and immigration laws; The exclusive economic zone (up to 200 miles), for the rights to exploit biological and mineral resources, balanced by the freedom of navigation and overflight for other nations. Finally, the so-called High Seas (beyond the EEZs), a space open to all states, governed by the principle of freedom of navigation, fishing, scientific research, and the laying of cables and pipelines, provided this is done peacefully and with respect for environmental protection. In the Mediterranean, the scarcity of “true” high seas makes the delimitation of exclusive economic zones between coastal states—such as Italy–Greece, Greece–Turkey, or Cyprus–Turkey—a delicate matter, often linked to gas and oil resources and political-military disputes.
The management of international waters therefore takes place through: bilateral and multilateral delimitation agreements; regional cooperation measures (for example, under the Barcelona Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment and the Protocol on Integrated Coastal Zone Management); and institutions such as the UNCLOS Authority for resources beyond EEZs, which also regulate the use of the seabed “beyond national jurisdiction.” Alongside the law of the sea, the Mediterranean is subject to intense military surveillance that reflects the overlapping interests of major global and regional powers.
The “management” of international waters is therefore not merely a matter of rules, but also of operational capabilities, intelligence infrastructure, and military alliances.
Furthermore, there are various key actors and spheres of influence. First and foremost, NATO and the U.S.: the U.S. Sixth Fleet has its main base in Gaeta (Italy) and projects power throughout the Mediterranean, with particular attention to the routes connecting the Persian Gulf and the Caspian Sea to European economies. The United States uses the Mediterranean as a hub to control energy supply routes and to project power toward the Middle East and North Africa. Then there is Russia, though numerically less present, which has a task force in the Mediterranean, with logistical bases in Syria and a strategic focus on the passages between the eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea. Obviously, the EU and individual member states, such as Italy, France, Greece, and Spain, maintain a strong naval presence, serving both national interests and EU and NATO operations. Then there are Israel and Turkey, which have advanced navies and conduct patrols and maritime traffic control around their coasts—Israel primarily regarding the Gaza Strip, and Turkey in the eastern Mediterranean in relation to energy resources.
These actors effectively define several areas of influence:
- The Western Mediterranean (Gibraltar–Tunisia): a strong EU–NATO presence, with control over migration routes and maritime traffic toward the port of Gibraltar, the sole strategic access point to the Mediterranean.
- The Central Mediterranean (Sicily–Libya): a frontline zone for Italian surveillance, rescue, and migration control operations, with Operation Safe Mediterranean expanding Italy’s naval presence to over 2 million km².
- The Eastern Mediterranean (Greece–Turkey–Cyprus–Israel): a theater of conflict over EEZs and energy sovereignty, with the deployment of military ships and specialized units monitoring natural gas fields.
The operational management of maritime control relies on coastal radar networks, which monitor naval and air traffic hundreds of miles from the coast, command and control systems (such as the MCCIS, Maritime Command and Control Information System) that link radars, ships, and aircraft into a single real-time “maritime picture,” and, of course, international cooperation coordinates maritime surveillance among the navies of some twenty European countries, as well as the information-sharing network with NATO and the southern Mediterranean.
This “situational awareness” apparatus allows for the monitoring not only of commercial traffic but also of migration flows, illicit activities (drug trafficking, arms trafficking, illegal fishing), intelligence operations on undersea cable communications, and, in general, any attempt to cross the Mediterranean without coming to the attention of the states concerned.
The Global Sumud Flotilla challenges the Mediterranean blockade
What happened with the Global Sumud Flotilla is yet another act demonstrating that there is an aggressor and a victim. A civilian flotilla organized by activists, humanitarian organizations, NGOs, and citizens from dozens of countries, with the stated goal of breaking the maritime blockade imposed by Israel on the Gaza Strip and delivering humanitarian aid to the Palestinian population, is attacked and seized—all while the other states operating in the Mediterranean stand by, subjugated to Israel’s authority.
The Sumud Flotilla is not a single vessel, but an international coordination of dozens of ships that set sail from various Mediterranean ports to converge in international waters and head toward the Palestinian coast. Thousands of activists and volunteers board the ships, often under conditions of high risk, yet fully aware of the great symbolic value of their action for the Palestinian people, while the elites continue to profit from their suffering.
The ships of the Sumud Flotilla primarily carry essential humanitarian aid, such as food, medicines, medical supplies, equipment for rebuilding destroyed infrastructure, and medical support—all items that Israel has banned for years, demonstrating the most atrocious barbarity that recent human history has ever witnessed. The presence of a dedicated medical fleet, with more than 1,000 healthcare professionals, has been explicitly linked to the effort to alleviate the crisis in Gaza’s healthcare system, devastated by years of war and blockade.
It is an act of symbolic and perfectly legal nonviolent resistance, where the use of dozens of boats, multiple flags, and symbols of peace, the LGBTQ+ community, anti-fascist movements, and international solidarity aims to create a “visible presence” that makes it more difficult for Israeli naval forces to use force, as coercion against unarmed civilians generates significant media and political backlash. One may or may not agree with the methods and nature of this initiative, but the fact remains that the social impact is extremely high and that, above all, Israel has committed an act of piracy involving numerous countries.
The Israeli Navy maintains a reinforced naval blockade, with naval patrols, frigates, and underwater vessels operating near Israeli and Gaza territorial waters. In previous missions, the flotilla was intercepted in international waters and the ships were escorted or stopped, on charges of violating security measures imposed by Tel Aviv. The events of the past few hours, unfortunately, are part of an operational practice that the terrorist state of Israel continues to employ.
Certainly, while the Sumud Flotilla relies on the law of the sea (freedom of navigation and the duty to assist human life at sea), it must nonetheless factor in the risk of interception, violence, arrests, or accidents. At the same time, the media and political dimensions of the mission compel states to balance security rigor with concerns over excessive force that could generate further international pressure on Israel.
The story of the Sumud Flotilla also highlights how the management of international waters in the Mediterranean is a realm of unstable conflict. And, above all, how there is no balance: there is a sovereign, Israel, which is free to do as it pleases, and a series of subordinate states that obey in silence, bound by a code of silence. Israel’s action against the Flotilla demands that we take a stand and take decisive action against those who have transformed the Mediterranean—a sea that should symbolize peace among three continents—into a space of raids and unjustifiable violence.
Zionists Are Gunning for Your Freedom of Speech
By Jack Hunter | The Libertarian Institute | May 1, 2026
The First Amendment of the Bill of Rights in the Constitution of the United States guarantees the right to free speech. This right has long differentiated the United States from other Western nations like the United Kingdom and Canada where laws against so-called “hate speech” laws exist and are enforced.
Thankfully, America is different. In our country, even alleged hate speech is protected speech to ensure democratic principles and debate.
In a 1929 dissenting opinion, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said that the Constitution secured “freedom for the thought that we hate.” In 2011, Chief Justice John Roberts said in a ruling that the First Amendment serves “to protect even hurtful speech on public issues to ensure that we do not stifle public debate.”
This constitutional protection has been increasingly threatened recently, particularly by pro-Israeli forces that have tried to frame any criticism of that government as “anti-Semitism” and thus hate speech punishable by law. This has included everything from arrests, to squashing campus debate to buying TikTok to an attempt to cover up human rights absuses in Gaza. President Donald Trump has even issued executive orders that use vague definitions of what constitutes “anti-Semitism” that comes with criminal penalties.
Mark Levin is an American-born Zionist radio host who is an outspoken advocate for Israel’s government, regularly calling anyone who criticizes the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran and conflict in Gaza “Nazis.”
Toward this agenda, Levin recently appeared to not agree with his own country’s free speech rights. On his latest Sunday Fox News program, unironically called Life, Liberty and Levin, the neoconservative pundit explained why free speech liberties in the U.S. have gone too far.
Seemingly worried that certain speech is protected in the United States, Levin said in the wake of the Secret Service taking down a shooter at the White House Correspondents Dinner on Friday, “First time things like this have happened, but it really is problematic because so much of it is protected.”
“And you hear people say, don’t you believe in the First Amendment?” Levin said. “They don’t even know what the First Amendment believes.”
Certain “speech” is “problematic” because “so much of it is protected.” You could see where this was headed.
Levin then explained what he believes “the First Amendment believes.” “Do you want to de-platform people?” he ranted. “You know, the libs do that. I don’t have any problem with de-platforming Nazis or jihadis.”
“Nazis,” Levin says. Levin uses this term loosely, all the time, and that’s putting it mildly.
Prominent libertarian personality Josie Glabach, known most popularly as “The Libertarian Redhead,” made a telling list of the many people and groups Levin has called Nazis since 2024:
- The Democrats
- The Democrat media
- An Australian bakery
- The Pakistani defense minister
- Libertarian Institute Director Scott Horton
- The entire Libertarian Party
- College students
- MMA fighter Jake Shields
- Nick Fuentes
- Putin’s buddies
- Influencer Dan Bilzarian
- The Houthis
- Comedian and libertarian personality Dave Smith
- Anyone who associates with Dave Smith
- Tucker Carlson
- Beirut
- Hezbollah
- A veteran who asked Mark to be more tolerant
- Influencer Myron Gaines
- The city of London
- Hamas
- The New York Times
- New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman
- A New York Times correspondent
- Terrorists;
- The “woke reich”
- Maine Democratic Senate candidate Graham Platner
- The United Nations
- Harvard University
- The city of Amsterdam
- Columbia University students
- Iterations of the “Iranian Nazi regime,” the “Islamic Nazi regime,” the “Islamo Nazi regime,” the “Islamist Nazi regime,” and “All of Iran (the new Nazis)”
- The Ayatollah (presumably of Iran)
- Former Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi
- A protestor on a subway
- Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib (D-MI)
- President Joe Biden’s entire State Department
- Turkish Preisdent Recep Erdoğan
- College basketball analyst Bruce Pearl
- Certain Arab, liberals and journalists
- Reporter Lulu Garcia-Navarro
- ISIS
- Seventeen random Twitter users
This eclectic group of entities great and small, many of whom are regular critics of Israel’s government, are “Nazis” in Levin’s view. As Libertarian Institute Senior Fellow Tom Woods succinctly put it, “Nazis’ includes everyone who mocks Levin.”
Levin continued his Sunday rant against “Nazis”:
“I don’t have any problem with de-platforming them. What does that mean, de-platforming them? A government law? No. It means that X or Twitter or Facebook or Amazon with Twitch and someone says you know what? You’re a low life we’re not paying, you know, get off our platform. What’s wrong with that?”
The neocon pundit appeared to say that private platforms should police speech according to the political views of Mark Levin. He is right that this is no violation of the First Amendment. Private companies can allow or restrict speech as they please. “It’s called private enterprise,” he said. “I got no problem with that.”
Then Levin basically said such speech was no different than pornography, which is not protected under the First Amendment. Levin continued, “I mean, what if they have this horrific pornography on? Is that okay? No, it’s not okay.”
“Because our kids have access to it,” he said. “People who are impressionable have access to it. “What if they had people screaming at the top of the lungs saying, assassinate this guy and assassinate that guy? Well, they shouldn’t do that.”
“Why? What’s the standard?” Levin went on. “You need to have a standard. What should the law be? What does the Constitution say?”
The Constitution says that all speech is protected, but “true threats” and obscenity are not.
But political opinions about Israel that go against Levin’s views are protected, whether he likes it or not.
That’s when Levin basically outright said that speech that criticizes Israel should be forbidden just like pornography. “I just think we’ve taken this too far because we’re not even talking about political speech, which is the most protected of all speech,” Levin said.
“We do limit speech,” he insisted. “We limit speech, pornography. We limit speech.”
What Levin, like so many other Zionists, truly want is for the First Amendment to be amended itself. They believe, whether they say it forthright or not (and Levin appears to be doing just that), that this legal provision designed by the Founders precisely to protect political speech should no longer protect speech that is critical of Israel’s government.
Americans have historically valued their free speech. American Zionists like Levin now want a carve out.
But the free speech guarantee enshrined in the United States’s governing charter is so integral to the American experience, to gut it for any reason would be to drastically alter the DNA of the soon to be 250-year-old country.
As an American, Mark Levin doesn’t seem to have a problem with doing just that—all in the service of a foreign country.
It might be better for Americans to instead wish other nations well, yet solely concentrate on our own affairs at home, and perhaps just as important, to stop listening to American pundits whose primary allegiance seems to be countries other than their own.
Court Forces German Chancellor Merz to Open Files on 300 “Insult the Chancellor” Cases
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | April 25, 2026
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has used the German state to pursue around 300 criminal investigations against people accused of insulting him, and his Chancellery spent months trying to keep the public from finding out which prosecutors were handling the cases. That wall has now come down.
The Higher Administrative Court of Berlin-Brandenburg has ordered the Bundeskanzleramt to identify every prosecutor’s office running a Merz-insult investigation, along with the file number for each one.
The ruling, which rejected the Chancellery’s appeal against an earlier decision of the Berlin Administrative Court, came after a legal challenge by Berlin daily Der Tagesspiegel. Until the judgment, roughly 300 criminal proceedings over alleged slights against the sitting head of government had been shielded from any journalistic scrutiny.
The legal hook for all of it is Section 188 of Germany’s criminal code, a special provision that gives people in political life reinforced protection against insult. The official English translation of the statute states that anyone who “insults a person who exercises a political office in relation to their office or in connection with their office shall be punished with imprisonment from three months to five years.”
A politician gets to sit at the center of a prosecution aimed at a citizen who said something unpleasant about them, and the punishment on the table is years in prison.
How cases enter the pipeline is itself revealing. Citizens are encouraged by NGOs and state-run reporting portals to flag supposed insults, sometimes anonymously.
Those reports travel to the Federal Criminal Police Office, which routes them to the relevant regional prosecutor’s office. The targeted politician is then notified and decides whether to file a formal criminal complaint or whether to leave the prosecution to run without objection. The Chancellery alone receives between 20 and 30 such files every month.
Merz has said he does not sign complaints himself, but also does not block the prosecutions that have been opened in his name. Whether that account holds up against the actual paperwork is precisely what the Chancellery was trying to prevent anyone from checking.
The Chancellery’s argument in court was that no heightened public interest justified handing the information over, and that merely naming the prosecutor’s offices and file numbers could violate the rights of accused individuals. The court did not accept it. The judges held that the Chancellor’s distinctive role in these proceedings made disclosure necessary, and that neither jurisdictional objections nor the absence of urgency stood in the way.
The scale alone deserves attention. A head of government who has triggered roughly 300 criminal investigations over things people said about him is using the machinery of the state against ordinary speech at a volume that does not look like an occasional recourse to legal remedy. It looks like a policy. And the instinct, once the numbers started circulating, was to hide the details rather than defend them.
The chilling effect of a regime like this does not depend on convictions. It depends on the knowledge that a critical Facebook post, a rude placard, or a sharp comment can summon the Bundeskriminalamt, a prosecutor, and potentially a house search. A Stuttgart man who called Merz a “Suffkopf,” roughly a drunkard, saw his home searched after Merz signed a complaint against him.
The lesson lands well beyond the individuals actually charged. Self-censorship becomes the rational response, which is the real product of the law.
Section 188’s defenders describe it as protection for democratic institutions against targeted harassment of officials. The practical architecture of the provision tells a different story.
The category of “insult” is elastic. German courts have struggled for years with where sharp political commentary ends and punishable disrespect begins, and individual judges have reached wildly different conclusions on facts that look almost identical. Into that vagueness steps a provision that hands the sitting Chancellor and his office a direct line to prosecutors considering whether to put a citizen through a criminal process.
The deeper question sits where it has always sat. A democracy that lets its head of government send police to the homes of citizens who call him names has already made a choice about which it values more, the dignity of the office or the tongue of the citizen. The court has forced some sunlight into the process. The provision that makes the process possible in the first place is still waiting for someone to deal with it.
How Israel moved Hermes 900 drone production to Serbia to hide from Iranian missiles
By Ivan Kesic – Press TV – April 25, 2026
The Israeli regime has quietly embarked on an effort to relocate production of its most important long-range strike drone – the Hermes 900- outside the occupied territories.
In Serbia, it has found its latest and most controversial partner. The strategy is simple: protect Tel Aviv’s supply chain from Iranian ballistic missiles.
On March 7, 2026, Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić made a cryptic announcement. Serbia, he said, would soon open a factory for “the most serious drones in the world” with a foreign partner from the Israeli regime.
By early April, reports had uncovered the full scope of the deal. Elbit Systems – the largest military company in the occupied territories and a firm repeatedly named by UN experts as profiting from the ongoing genocide in Gaza – had agreed to establish a joint drone production facility in Šimanovci, just thirty kilometers west of Belgrade.
The factory, which could begin operations as early as late April 2026, is designed to produce two types of unmanned aerial vehicles, including a long-range model capable of flying at altitudes exceeding six kilometers.
While most media attention has focused on the emerging arms race between Serbia and Croatia, a far more consequential story has gone largely unreported.
What makes this deal particularly significant is not merely the technology transfer or the financial terms, but the strategic logic driving it.
The Israeli regime, having suffered devastating losses of its Hermes 900 fleet during the recent US-Israeli war of aggression against Iran, is desperately seeking to diversify its production base – outside the reach of Iranian retaliation.
Serbian factory: Details of the 2026 agreement
The joint venture agreement between Elbit Systems and Serbia’s state-owned Yugoimport SDPR gives the notorious Israeli arms company a controlling 51 percent stake, while the Serbian partner holds the remaining 49 percent.
According to documents obtained by some journalists and confirmed by two independent sources close to the military industry, the factory will produce two distinct drone types.
The first is a short-range model with a high payload and rotary wings, designed for tactical reconnaissance and strike missions in confined operational environments.
The second is far more advanced: a long-range model, faster and capable of operating at altitudes exceeding six kilometers, making it suitable for deep-penetration surveillance missions well beyond Serbian borders.
A source familiar with the deal described the long-range drone as “more advanced” than the Pegasus, a combat reconnaissance drone that Serbia already produces domestically.
“It has a higher flight altitude and greater operational autonomy,” the source explained. “The essence of the whole story is the transfer of technology, because our engineers will also work on it. This drone is actually the crowning glory of the entire project.”
Experts from Utva, an aircraft factory owned by the SDPR, will also be involved in the production process, a clear indication of significant investment in local technical expertise.
The planned site of the factory has itself become a source of controversy: a facility owned by Pink Media Group, the media empire of Željko Mitrović, a businessman with close ties to Vučić’s ruling party.
Following the publication of investigative reports, Pink Media Group issued a denial, claiming that neither Mitrović nor any entity associated with him had participated in negotiations or leased any facility for the project.
However, the denial did not address the documentary evidence or the two independent sources that confirmed the arrangement. The question of the factory’s precise location remains unresolved.
Serbian-Israeli cooperation: Weapons, spyware, and political connections
The drone factory agreement is merely the latest chapter in a rapidly deepening relationship between Belgrade and Tel Aviv that encompasses weapons trade, intelligence technology, political consulting, and diplomatic alignment.
The value of ammunition and weapons exports from Serbia to the Israeli regime has increased by an astonishing 42 times since 2023, reaching 114 million euros by the end of 2025, according to available evidence.
The vast majority of these exports were conducted through Yugoimport SDPR, the same state-owned company now partnering with Elbit on the drone factory.
Beyond conventional weapons, the partnership extends into the shadowy realm of surveillance and espionage technology.
Serbian authorities have used forensic products purchased from the Israeli company Cellebrite to unlock and extract data from mobile devices belonging to journalists and social media activists.
A new spyware tool designated “NoviSpy” has been deployed to infect these devices, enabling the Serbian internal security service to monitor and suppress critical voices.
The methods employed bear the unmistakable signature of Israeli technology and training. The personal connections between the two regimes run deep.
Asaf Eisin, an Israeli consultant, has been described as the main architect of Vučić’s victorious election campaigns.
His role extends beyond mere political consulting; he is widely considered Vučić’s secretive strategist, providing the Serbian president with the kind of sophisticated campaign management techniques developed in the occupied territories.
The Serbian opposition has characterized Eisin as an “agency for winning elections,” and his track record across multiple political campaigns in the Balkans supports this assessment.
In September 2024, while the Israeli regime faced increasing international isolation over its genocidal actions in Gaza, the regime’s president, Isaac Herzog, paid an official visit to Belgrade, meeting with top Serbian officials.
The timing was significant: the Israeli regime was under diplomatic pressure worldwide, yet Vučić welcomed Herzog as a gesture of solidarity.
Foreign policy analysts noted that Serbia saw this as an opportunity to demonstrate its alignment with Washington’s closest West Asian ally, a calculated move to curry favor with the incoming Trump administration.
This alignment was formalized in September 2020 through the Washington Agreement, in which Serbia committed to opening a chamber of commerce office and a state office in Jerusalem al-Quds.
The move was hailed in Tel Aviv as “an important and courageous step,” while critics noted that it placed Serbia firmly on the side of the occupation and against Palestinian sovereignty.
The United Arab Emirates, which normalized relations with the Israeli regime in 2020, has emerged as a significant investor in Serbia, while also serving as a conduit for technology transfer and military cooperation.
The connection to the UAE, brokered through the same Washington Agreement, has created an axis that runs from Abu Dhabi through Tel Aviv to Belgrade.
This triangular relationship has allowed Serbia to access advanced defense technologies while providing the Israeli regime with a European production and logistics hub.
Elbit Systems: A company surrounded by global controversy
Elbit Systems, the Israeli military firm at the center of the Serbian drone factory deal, has accumulated a staggering record of international controversies spanning human rights violations, financial divestment campaigns, grassroots activism, and legal challenges.
The company generates approximately 90 percent of its revenue from military activities and is deeply integrated into the Israeli regime’s military apparatus, making it a focal point of criticism amid the ongoing genocide in Gaza or the occupied West Bank.
One of the longest-running controversies concerns Elbit’s involvement in infrastructure tied to the Israeli occupation, particularly the surveillance systems installed along the separation wall in the occupied West Bank.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued an advisory opinion in 2004 declaring the wall contrary to international law, yet Elbit continued to supply technology for its operation.
This triggered early international backlash. In 2009, Norway’s sovereign wealth fund divested from Elbit, with the finance minister stating at the time: “We do not want to finance companies that contribute so directly to violations of international humanitarian law.”
Similar decisions followed from Danish and Swedish financial institutions.
The Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement has made Elbit a primary target, noting that the company’s technology contributes directly to horrendous human rights violations against Palestinians in Gaza and the occupied territories.
These campaigns have achieved tangible results. HSBC withdrew its investment from Elbit in 2018 after the company acquired IMI Systems, which manufactures cluster munitions.
In 2026, a major Canadian investment arm divested from Elbit following sustained protests over its role in supplying equipment used in the Gaza genocide.
A UN Special Rapporteur report published in June 2025 listed Elbit among companies profiting from the genocide in Gaza. The report specifically mentioned drones developed and supplied by Elbit, describing how they operate alongside warplanes during bombing campaigns, used to monitor Palestinians and gather intelligence on targets.
The report concluded that “drones, hexacopters and quadcopters have become ubiquitous killing machines in the skies over Gaza.”
Direct action activism has targeted Elbit facilities worldwide. In the United Kingdom, groups such as Palestine Action have broken into and occupied Elbit-linked sites. The 2024 Filton facility break-in caused significant damage and led to arrests and high-profile court cases.
In 2025, Elbit closed a UK facility after sustained protests, a symbolic victory for activists demonstrating that reputational and military costs can affect even large arms firms.
In Spain, a steel shipment linked to Elbit’s subsidiary IMI Systems was canceled following protests. In France, the government barred Israeli military firms, including Elbit, from displaying offensive weapons at the Paris Air Show in 2025, citing the genocide in Gaza.
In 2025, a NATO-affiliated procurement agency barred Elbit from contracts due to a corruption investigation, suggesting that the company’s liabilities extend beyond activist campaigns into formal military-sector governance.
Meanwhile, in North Macedonia, Elbit’s involvement in “Safe City” surveillance systems has raised concerns about mass surveillance, transparency, and potential misuse, extending the ethical debate beyond armed conflict into civil liberties and digital rights.
Hermes 900: Capabilities and role in the aggression against Iran
The Hermes 900 unmanned aerial vehicle, produced by Elbit Systems, has proven to be the most important drone in the Israeli regime’s inventory for long-range strikes, and its performance during the recent US-Israeli aggression against Iran demonstrated both its strategic value and its acute vulnerabilities.
As a medium-altitude, long-endurance platform, the Hermes 900 can remain airborne for over 30 to 40 hours, operating at high altitudes that allow it to monitor vast areas without requiring frequent refueling.
This endurance is enhanced by satellite communications, enabling beyond-line-of-sight control and real-time data transmission across distances that would be impossible for ground-controlled systems.
The drone’s long-range capability made it particularly suitable for surveillance missions far from Israeli-occupied territories, including monitoring Iranian military infrastructure and tracking the movements of the Axis of Resistance forces throughout the region.
The Hermes 900 is equipped with sophisticated intelligence-gathering systems, including electro-optical and infrared sensors, synthetic aperture radar, and signals intelligence tools.
These allow it to detect troop movements, missile systems, and communication signals, even at night or in poor weather conditions.
Crucially, the Hermes 900 can designate targets using laser systems and relay precise coordinates, enabling fighter jets or other platforms—including long-range cruise missiles—to conduct strikes based on the intelligence it gathers.
This targeting capability made the drone a critical component of the regime’s aggression against Iranian infrastructure during the war that began on February 28, 2026.
The cost to the Israeli regime was still catastrophic. The largest number of Israeli drones shot down during the recent aggression were of the Hermes 900 type—approximately 20 units, with several more downed in 2025.
No official figure exists for how many Hermes 900 units the Israeli regime originally possessed, but estimates place the number in the dozens, somewhere between 25 and 50.
Some military analysts estimate that the attrition rate for the Hermes 900 fleet may have exceeded 80 percent during the unprovoked war of aggression.
The blow was so severe that the Israeli Air Force reportedly avoided deploying its remaining units over Iran for extended periods, effectively ceding the skies to Iranian air defenses and forcing Tel Aviv to rely on less capable platforms.
This degradation of Israel’s most important long-range surveillance and targeting asset represented a strategic victory for Iran’s air defense network, which had demonstrated the ability to detect, track, and destroy even the most advanced unmanned platforms.
Strategic logic: Foreign production as a hedge against Iranian retaliation
The timing of Serbia’s drone factory agreement with Elbit Systems is not coincidental.
The contract was signed in August 2025, a month and a half after the first US-Israeli aggression against Iran, when it became clear to Tel Aviv that Iranian ballistic missiles could threaten domestic production facilities.
The Israeli regime has since been insisting on peripheral supply chains, offering its clients relatively outdated surveillance technologies while using the arrangement to secure aircraft platforms for new aggressions throughout the region.
This strategy is not new. According to military analysts, the Israeli regime agreed to cooperate with India on Hermes 900 production as early as 2018 through a joint venture between Adani Defence & Aerospace and Elbit Systems, with a dedicated UAV facility in Hyderabad becoming operational in December 2018 for producing components.
By approximately 2020, this facility had expanded to assembling and exporting Hermes 900 units, making India the first production site outside the occupied territories.
Military analysts estimate that India produced approximately 20 of the estimated 50 Hermes 900 drones in the Israeli fleet, meaning that nearly 40 percent of Tel Aviv’s long-range unmanned surveillance capability was manufactured outside the occupied territories, a significant hedge against the vulnerability of domestic production facilities to Iranian retaliation.
In 2024, India formally fielded its own version, the Drishti-10 Starliner, with the first indigenously assembled unit delivered to the Indian Navy in January 2024.
The Swiss experience with Hermes 900 production has been far less successful, offering a cautionary tale for Serbia. Switzerland acquired the drones in 2015 but required extensive modifications through the Swiss partner RUAG to enable safe operation in civilian airspace.
The integration of a detect-and-avoid system proved extremely difficult, leading to repeated delays that pushed full operational capability to around 2029.
Some delivered drones could not meet expected performance standards, and one notable incident involved structural issues that caused a drone to break apart during testing.
The Swiss government was forced to scale back its requirements, abandoning certain advanced features while costs continued to rise.
Parliamentary committees raised doubts about whether RUAG and Elbit could fix ongoing problems, with some officials discussing potential cancellation.
For a neutral country like Switzerland, the deal also sparked debate about whether such partnerships compromise neutrality or align the country too closely with foreign military-industrial interests.
Brazil’s experience offers a different set of challenges. While the Hermes 900 is assembled locally through AEL Sistemas, a Brazilian subsidiary of Elbit, the program has been plagued by technical reliability issues.
Multiple crashes have occurred, including one during the 2024 floods in Rio Grande do Sul when a drone used in rescue operations crashed due to a technical problem.
In March 2026, another Hermes 900 crashed during a military exercise in Mato Grosso do Sul, reportedly leaving the Brazilian Air Force with only one operational unit at the time.
These incidents have raised concerns about fleet fragility and whether Brazil is over-reliant on a complex foreign system that it does not fully control.
Even with local assembly, critical components, software, and maintenance expertise remain tied to Israeli suppliers, creating a structural dependency that critics argue limits Brazil’s technological sovereignty.
Serbian gamble: Risks and domestic opposition
Within Serbia, the drone factory agreement has generated significant controversy.
Military observers point out that Elbit will retain complete control over intellectual property, meaning that while Serbian workers may assemble drones, the country will not gain the ability to independently produce or replicate the systems.
Petar Vojinović, an aviation analyst, explained that the most likely arrangement gives Elbit control over sales and intellectual property, with Yugoimport merely participating in production and collecting revenue percentages from sales.
“It is expected that Elbit will retain complete control over the intellectual property,” he noted.
“Thus, Elbit’s intellectual property will be protected, and Serbia will most likely not be able to produce or replicate the drones that will be manufactured.”
Other analysts emphasized that the key issue is knowledge transfer, arguing that If part of the development and production occurs in Serbia, it means training personnel, access to technology, and the possibility of further development without complete dependence on partners.
The political dimension of the deal has also drawn sharp criticism. UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese, during a visit to Serbia in March 2026, described Serbia as “one of Israel’s strongest and most determined allies, without any shame.”
Serbian civil society organizations have raised concerns that by hosting an Elbit production facility, Serbia could become a legitimate military target in any future conflict involving the Israeli regime.
Unlike Croatia, which has secured its position through NATO and EU membership, Serbia remains outside both alliances, lacking the protective umbrella that would deter potential retaliation.
The Serbian people are widely critical of their authorities, with many claiming that officials are reaping lucrative commissions from such controversial agreements.
The fact that the factory may be located on property associated with a media mogul closely tied to the ruling party has only intensified suspicions about corruption and self-dealing.
While Vučić has portrayed the deal as a triumph of Serbian diplomacy and technological advancement, critics see it as a risky alignment with a pariah regime that could expose Serbia to diplomatic isolation or worse.
West Bank is Defenseless – This is Why Israeli Settler Attacks Continue
Israel killed 14-year-old Aws al-Naasan, along with 32-year-old Jihad Abu Naim, who tried to help him. (Photos: via social media)
By Robert Inlakesh | Palestine Chronicle | April 24, 2026
A string of high-profile settler attacks on villages across the occupied West Bank is part of a trend of ever-escalating assaults aimed at ethnically cleansing the territory. These extremists, backed by the Israeli army, are emboldened by the refusal of the Palestinian Authority to act.
Earlier this week, an Israeli settler assault on a school in the village of al-Mughayyer, near Ramallah, resulted in the killing of a 14-year-old school boy, Aws al-Naasan, along with 32-year-old Jihad Abu Naim, who had attempted to come to the aid of the children who had been opened fire upon.
The incident caused an uproar, yet only a day later, another Palestinian man was executed by a settler in the village of Deir Dibwan, after which the Israeli military rounded up dozens of men and placed them under humiliating detention.
These assaults and ongoing series of pogroms, where settlers alongside their army comrades will burn down homes, businesses, and vehicles, are part of a larger effort aimed at ethnic cleansing.
Since October of 2023, at least 75 Palestinian villages and communities have been partially or completely ethnically cleansed, according to the latest statistics published by Israeli rights group B’tselem. Life in general has been greatly impacted throughout the occupied West Bank as a result of the ultra-emboldened settler violence problem.
However, there is a deeper-rooted issue at play here. There is nobody there to help protect or respond to these violent assaults and killing sprees, with the exception of the occasional lone-wolf operations carried out by individuals who grow frustrated with their predicament. Even these kinds of attacks have greatly decreased over the past year or so, however.
There were armed resistance groups that had independently formed in places like Jenin Refugee Camp and Nour al-Shams Refugee Camp, yet they have been largely crushed or driven into hiding for now.
The unescapable fact about how these groups were dismantled was the pernicious role of the corrupt Palestinian Authority, which worked to do Israel’s dirty work for it, even slaughtering Palestinians who dared to pick up arms and fight, including killing innocent bystanders, including children.
Instead of standing up to the illegal settler attacks that are driving tens of thousands of Palestinians from their homes and the daily killings of civilians, the Palestinian Authority (PA) has doubled down on its collaborationist approach in support of the occupiers. Even arresting and then extraditing a 75-year-old Palestinian, Mahmoud Khader Abed Adra, who was accused of attacking a Jewish restaurant in Paris back in 1982.
The priority of this PA is to protect Israeli interests as they enrich themselves, having completely thrown their national project into the dustbin in search of pleasing the West and Arab despots. Yet, some 30% of the West Bank population is employed by the PA, with another 18% finding employment amongst Israeli settlers and Israeli businesses.
If we consider now that up to 35% of the West Bank population is considered to be unemployed and that the Western NGOs have a major influence on the territory, also employing a considerable number of people, then it begins to become more understandable why the situation remains as it is. The majority of employed Palestinians work for the PA or their occupiers directly.
The PA is said to have around 60,000 men as part of their overall security apparatus, trained by the British, Jordanians, US, and others, yet they aren’t there to protect Palestinians; they are there as another layer of occupation. If you stand up to the PA, you will be arrested and tortured, perhaps even brutally killed in front of your family, like the famous dissident Nizar Banat.
Understanding this is key to comprehending why the territory’s people have been left so incredibly defenseless and why an Intifada has not yet occurred. If such an uprising is to begin, it will mean that it will be totally organic and completely outside the fold of the PA, perhaps even collapsing its corrupt system altogether.
Even on the international level, the Palestinian cause has only been used to drive the selfish interests of a small group of Palestinian elites, while completely abandoning the people’s project. Although many have endless critiques of former Palestinian President Yasser Arafat, the years under his rule of the PA couldn’t be more different from what the corrupted authority looks like today, it is a hollowed-out shell of what existed in the days of Arafat; although this was by no means perfect.
Unfortunately, the PA is now the main obstacle to Palestinians resisting the ethnic cleansing of the West Bank. It may be so that Gaza’s destruction was quicker and more brutal because it chose to fight, but if the West Bank had risen up, the Israelis would have been in a very tough position.
Unlike Gaza, the West Bank is saturated with Israeli settlers, and the price that they would pay in the event that a real resistance would emerge would be much more painful, which is precisely why the Israelis have gone to great lengths to strengthen their positions and prevent freedom of movement there to such an extent since October 2023.
To the Israelis, they see the West Bank as ‘Judea and Samaria’ – the Israeli biblical heartland – while the Gaza Strip is an afterthought. The senior Israeli leadership, from its PM Benjamin Netanyahu to the opposition leader Yair Lapid, is all in agreement on developing a “Greater Israel” that is currently attempting to expand further into Lebanon and Syria.
As for the fate of the West Bank, left completely defenseless, with a PA that is actively working for its occupier, it appears to be grim. These settler attacks are only going to accelerate and grow more violent. The only way that this will ever be forced to change is in the event of a mass uprising, because individual acts alone are not going to alter the current predicament.
Attempting to predict the future is a difficult task; however, with the ever-growing unemployment rate, alongside the overall decline in living standards and constant settler/occupation army violence against the civilian population, an uprising is only a matter of time away.
– Robert Inlakesh is a journalist, writer, and documentary filmmaker. He focuses on the Middle East, specializing in Palestine.
‘Profound moral failure’: Iran denounces US endorsement of assassinations amid fragile ceasefire
Press TV – April 24, 2026
Iran says the United States has turned into a state sponsor of terrorism after President Donald Trump endorsed a Washington Post op-ed that called for the assassination of Iranian leaders.
The op-ed by Marc Thiessen suggested giving Iran’s government a 72-hour ultimatum before ending the current ceasefire, resuming attacks, and “killing the ones who don’t want a deal.”
“The United States, which once presented itself as a cradle of democracy, freedom, and human values, now appears to become a promoter of terrorism, murder, and mass violence,” Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei wrote on X on Thursday.
“What should one call this, if not a profound moral failure?” he asked.
Peace talks in Islamabad fell through due to US maximalist demands, and the Islamic Republic has said it will not rejoin the diplomatic process unless Washington lifts an illegal blockade it has imposed against Iranian vessels and ports.
The United States and Israel launched an unprovoked war of terrorism against Iran on Feb. 28, assassinating Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei along with several senior military commanders. In response, Iran’s armed forces carried out retaliatory missile and drone operations against US and Israeli military assets for more than 40 days, forcing Washington and Tel Aviv to declare a ceasefire.
Faced with Tehran’s unflinching response to the blockade, the United States has recently attempted to suggest a lack of unity among Iranian officials over peace talks.
On Thursday, President Masoud Pezeshkian, Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, and Judiciary Chief Gholam-Hossein Mohseni Ejei issued a collective response to Trump, denouncing his remarks about “divisions between extremists and moderates” in Iran as unwarranted provocations and emphasizing national unity.
Separately, Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Mojtaba Khamenei said the remarkable unity among Iranians has disrupted the calculations of those seeking to undermine the Islamic Republic.
“Due to the remarkable unity created among compatriots, a fracture has occurred in the enemy,” the Leader wrote on X. He warned that the enemy’s media operations are targeting the minds and psyches of the people to undermine national unity and security.
ELNET taking UK journalists on secret pro-‘Israel’ propaganda tours
Al Mayadeen | April 24, 2026
A lobbying organization, ELNET, has been quietly arranging trips to “Israel” for British journalists and retired military personnel, according to an investigation published by Declassified. The tours coincide with the Israeli military’s ongoing campaign that has killed over 259 Palestinian and Lebanese journalists since 2023.
The investigation noted that on Wednesday, journalist Amal Khalil and photographer Zeinab Faraj were reporting from southern Lebanon when an Israeli airstrike targeted them. Khalil was killed and Faraj was seriously injured. The Israeli military is responsible for two-thirds of all journalist killings globally in 2025, the report states.
While systematically killing Palestinian journalists, Declassified reported that the Israeli government has blocked foreign media workers from entering Gaza, effectively creating a blackout of its military operations.
ELNET created to counter criticism of ‘Israel’
According to the investigation, ELNET was founded in 2007 with the stated aim of “countering the widespread criticism of Israel in Europe.” The group is increasingly viewed as the European equivalent of AIPAC, the powerful American-Israeli lobby.
Declassified found that journalists who participated in ELNET delegations have written for major British publications including the Telegraph, Spectator and Mail on Sunday. The group has also taken former British military officers to “Israel”, who subsequently portrayed the IOF’s operations in Gaza in a favourable light.
Professor Des Freedman of Goldsmiths told Declassified that such trips are not genuine fact-finding missions but rather “junkets specifically designed to generate pro-Israel coverage.” He added that embedded journalism of this kind is “utterly scandalous during a genocide when the rest of the world’s media have been locked out of Gaza.”
ELNET has close links to Israeli government
The investigation reveals that ELNET maintains close ties to the Israeli government. Its board members include two former advisors to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The group was invited to a 2024 meeting with foreign minister Gideon Sa’ar to discuss improving “public diplomacy”, and its delegations are frequently organized “in partnership” with the Israeli Foreign Ministry.
Emmanuel Navon, who directed ELNET’s “Israel” office between 2023 and 2025, described “Israel’s” offensive into Rafah as “necessary” and dismissed concerns about Palestinian civilians, Declassified reports.
ELNET’s UK branch is directed by former MP Joan Ryan, who once chaired Labour Friends of Israel. Under her leadership, the group has sought to cast doubt on casualty figures from Gaza, calling them “demonstrably unreliable and strategically manipulated.” The UK branch has also condemned British recognition of a Palestinian state as a “PR win” for Hamas and urged the restoration of arms exports to “Israel.”
Journalist declared ‘war must go on’ after ELNET trip
Declassified identified British journalist Zoe Strimpel, who writes for the Sunday Telegraph, as one participant in an ELNET delegation. Days after returning from “Israel”, she wrote in The Spectator that “most people” in “Israel” agree that “the war must go on until Hamas is completely destroyed.”
In a separate Telegraph article, Strimpel dismissed accusations of “Israeli ‘genocide’ in Gaza” as “grotesquely false”. When approached by Declassified about her participation in the ELNET trip, she declined to offer any defensive response, stating, “The more pro-Israel the better in my view.”
Another participant, David Rose, wrote for the Jewish Chronicle after his trip that “the trauma experienced throughout Israeli society means serious consideration of the longer-term relationship between Israel and the Palestinians is almost impossible to contemplate.”
Former British generals toured Gaza with ELNET
The investigation also revealed that former British military officers have joined ELNET delegations. Retired British army officer Sir John McColl, who served as a NATO commander in Europe, joined a September 2024 delegation that met with Netanyahu and former Security Minister, both wanted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes.
The group received briefings from Israeli military commanders and spent time in Gaza “observing troops in action.” Shortly after returning, McColl wrote in The Times that the Israeli military’s “rules of engagement in Gaza are at least as rigorous as those of the British army.” ELNET subsequently listed McColl’s article as one of its “recent successes” in an impact report.
Three other former British military figures on that delegation were Johnny Mercer, Colonel Richard Kemp and Major Andrew Fox. Fox later wrote on Substack, “When does a journalist become a legitimate military target? Many not often enough.”
#FreeYousofAzizi: Petition launched to seek release of Iranian academic, anti-war activist detained in US
Press TV – April 23, 2026
A petition has been launched calling for the release of Yousof Azizi, an Iranian researcher, journalist, political analyst, and PhD candidate at Virginia Tech, who has been detained by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) despite holding valid legal status.
According to a website launched by his supporters, Azizi was taken into custody in front of his home in Maryland on April 13 and denied access to a lawyer.
Press TV was the first media outlet to report on his arbitrary arrest by ICE.
A day later, he was held at the Baltimore ICE Detention Center, and visitation was prohibited to his family or lawyers.
On April 15, Azizi was transferred to Louisiana against his will. His lawyer immediately requested his release by posting bond.
Two days later, on April 17, he was transferred again to Arizona against his will, as he informed his wife over a short phone call, notes the website.
Azizi is a father of two young children and an active member of the Iranian community in the US who has publicly and unapologetically spoken against the unprovoked and illegal US-Israeli war of aggression against the Islamic Republic of Iran.
A media personality with regular appearances on multiple international English and Persian media outlets, including Press TV, Azizi has been one of the few voices in the Persian media sphere to openly and vociferously oppose the Zionist lobby’s influence on US foreign policy.
His media commentary has consistently criticized US military aggression against Iran and the Israeli genocidal war against Palestinians in Gaza, the occupied West Bank and Lebanon.
His case has alarmed civil rights advocates in the US, who view it as an example of politically driven immigration enforcement, which has become common under the Trump administration.
“When no clear legal violation is presented, we must ask: on what basis is he being held,” the change.org petition that has garnered significant attention notes.
Supporters of the campaign say the case raises serious concerns about due process, justice, and the increasingly blurred line between law and politics in the US.
They stress that silence does not serve justice and that awareness matters, demanding a fair review of Azizi’s case and his immediate release from ICE custody.
Hundreds of foreign nationals, including Iranians, have been detained or deported by immigration authorities in the US in recent months on flimsy pretexts.
You can join the petition to press for Azizi’s release here.
After the ceasefire illusion: Why Gaza’s “Day After” still has no buyer?
By Dr Mustafa Fetouri | MEMO | April 23, 2026
The international community remains fixated on a phantom: Gaza’s “Day After.” While Washington, Cairo, and Doha debate elaborate governance frameworks and the “Board of Peace,” these plans share a fatal flaw—they lack a viable “buyer” on the ground.
This diplomatic theatre has been eclipsed by the US-Israeli aggression against Iran that began on 28th February. Since then, Gaza has been sidelined globally, yet the genocide—begun in October 2023—has never stopped. Even before the Iran escalation, the 10th October ceasefire was a hollow promise; Israel violated the agreement over 2,400 times through near-daily air raids and shelling.
Since that supposed de-escalation, nearly 1,000 Palestinian civilians have been killed, pushing the total death toll past 72,300. This grim reality proves the “Day After” is not a sincere peace plan, but a cynical mask for a permanent, lethal status quo. Far from transitioning to Phase II, the current impasse suggests the ceasefire was merely a tactical suspension of a conflict Israel refuses to end. With the occupation intact and violations occurring daily, Gaza is not moving toward a post-war era. Instead, it is being forced into a state of managed catastrophe, where “peace” serves as a placeholder for the next phase of destruction.
The “Day After” blueprints—specifically the Trump-led Board of Peace and the National Transitional Committee (NTC)—envision technocratic governance for Gaza but face a wall of refusal. For the Israeli government, any plan offering a pathway to Palestinian sovereignty is a non-starter; Netanyahu’s coalition instead prioritises “forward defence” and indefinite military hegemony. Conversely, the Palestinian Authority (PA) remains wary of being “parachuted” into the ruins on the back of Israeli tanks, a move that would permanently strip them of national legitimacy.
The vacuum is further complicated by the survival of the Resistance on the ground. Despite the fanfare surrounding the Board of Peace’s “Phase II,” Hamas has explicitly rejected any form of international guardianship, viewing the NTC not as a governing partner, but as a Trojan horse for disarmament. Meanwhile, the wealthy Arab states—the intended financiers of a reconstruction effort now estimated to cost $71.4 billion—have failed to commit any tangible funds.
Their hesitance is rooted in a grim economic reality: the regional losses they have accumulated, and continue to accumulate, from the spillover of the war on Iran have depleted the very sovereign wealth once earmarked for Gaza.
Without a “buyer” willing to assume the immense security and political risks of governing a site of ongoing genocide, the various “roadmaps” coming out of Washington and Brussels serve as little more than academic exercises in a theater of the absurd. The international community continues to pitch governance models to a phantom audience, while the reality on the ground remains one of systematic destruction, leaving Gaza caught in a loop where “reconstruction” is discussed as a future hope but never funded as a present necessity.
The “Day After” illusion is further sustained by the inflammatory rhetoric of Nickolay Mladenov, the High Representative for the Board of Peace. In his recent April 2026 briefings, Mladenov has essentially weaponised Gaza’s reconstruction, explicitly linking the release of the $71.4 billion in aid to the immediate and total disarmament of Palestinian factions.
By framing the situation as a binary choice—disarm or continue to suffer—Mladenov has abandoned the role of a neutral mediator.
Hamas has responded by accusing Mladenov of siding with the Israeli occupation and ignoring the thousands of ceasefire violations that have occurred since October 2026 effectively freezing the process in Phase II. By prioritizing the “decommissioning of weapons” over the immediate cessation of the genocide and the lifting of the blockade, Mladenov’s framework has become a symbol of international bias rather than a bridge to peace. This disconnect is why the “Day After” has no buyer: the brokers are selling a plan that demands the surrender of the victims while the aggressor continues its military operations with impunity.
Sensing that the Resistance groups are not convinced by his frameworks, Mladenov has recently attempted to soften his public tone while maintaining his rigid demands. In an interview with Reuters on 20th April, he admitted that negotiations with Hamas are “not easy,” yet he struck a jarringly optimistic note, claiming he is “optimistic that we will be able to come up with an arrangement that works for all sides and, most importantly, works for the people in Gaza.” Since neither Israel—which continues its strikes—nor the Resistance—which has rejected international guardianship—has publicly shifted their positions, Mladenov’s forward-looking posture appears increasingly detached from the ground reality.
In recent high-level meetings in Cairo (ending 17th April), Hamas negotiators, led by Khalil al-Hayya, delivered a firm list of prerequisites to the Egyptian mediators. They made it clear that they will not consider any decommissioning of weapons without:
- A definitive and irreversible plan toward a sovereign Palestinian State.
- The complete and immediate lifting of the 19-year blockade.
- A full Israeli withdrawal to the pre-October lines (specifically removing the “Yellow Line” military zones).
- The prior implementation of all Phase I humanitarian commitments, including the reopening of all commercial crossings and the restoration of Gaza’s power plant.
By insisting on these core national rights as a baseline, the Resistance has effectively neutralized Mladenov’s “aid-for-arms” trade-off, exposing the Board of Peace as a seller with a product that the actual stakeholders refuse to buy.
Ultimately, the “Day After” is failing because it has lost its primary architect. Donald Trump, once the loudest champion of these regional “deals,” is now completely bogged down by the escalating war on Iran, a conflict that is siphoning away the political capital and attention once directed toward Gaza. His schedule for next month confirms this pivot: a rescheduled state visit to China (May 14-15) and a high-stakes reception for the UK’s King Charles later this month, both of which were delayed specifically by his war on Iran.
With Trump preoccupied by a naval blockade in the Strait of Hormuz and a domestic battle over war powers, Gaza has been relegated to a secondary theatre.
This lack of American bandwidth means the “Board of Peace” is effectively a rudderless ship. For the people on the ground, this means the “Day After” is not just a geopolitical myth, but a casualty of a larger regional fire that the White House is currently more interested in fuelling than extinguishing.
Wired for War: Israel’s Black Cube and the infiltration of Europe
Israeli spies-for-hire interfered in elections in Cyprus and Slovenia
RT | April 23, 2026
Political hit-jobs in Cyprus and Slovenia are just the tip of an election interference iceberg in Europe, involving a dark nexus of Israeli spies, defense chiefs, and tech companies. The threat is real, but the EU is staying silent.
Targeting the EU: Israeli spy firm’s open admission
A week after Cyprus assumed the EU’s rotating presidency in January, a video appeared on social media – from a relatively obscure account named ‘Emily Thompson – showing President Nikos Christodoulides’s brother-in-law, a former energy minister, and a major construction magnate discussing influence-peddling arrangements between Christodoulides and foreign investors. Across a series of surreptitious recordings, the three also allege that Christodoulides took cash bribes during his 2023 campaign, and was taking cash to block EU sanctions against Russian business figures.
Cypriot authorities immediately declared that the video bears all “the characteristics of organized Russian disinformation campaigns.” Anonymous EU diplomats told Euractiv that Brussels viewed Moscow as the prime suspect, and authorities in Nicosia said that they had reached out to the US and Israel for assistance in identifying the video’s source. AP and Euronews headlined likely Russian involvement.
The release of the video undermined Christodoulides – triggering the resignations of his most senior aide and his charity director wife – and put a black mark on Cyprus’ stint at the helm of the EU.
The ‘Videogate’ scandal simmered in the background until last week, when Black Cube, an Israeli private intelligence agency, admitted that it had recorded and edited the video. The company said that it had compiled the video on behalf of a private client – not a state actor – and that it “has cooperated with the Cypriot authorities and expresses confidence that they will establish the truth and bring those responsible to justice.”
What is Black Cube?
A screenshot from Black Cube’s website
Founded in 2011 by “veterans of Israel’s elite intelligence units,” Black Cube describes itself as “the world’s leading human intelligence firm,” capable of finding “hard evidence otherwise impossible to obtain” in support of “high-profile litigations, arbitrations, and white-collar crime cases.”
The term ‘Human Intelligence’, or ‘HUMINT’, is key here. Unlike open-source intelligence (OSINT), which relies on uncovering publicly-available information, HUMINT is gathered through covert surveillance, interrogation, and the management of sources and informers through bribery, blackmail, or intimidation. It is the kind of illegal or quasi-legal tradecraft usually practiced by state intelligence agencies.
Black Cube co-founders Dan Zorella and Avi Yanus are veterans of this underworld. Zorella served in the Israel Defense Forces’ (IDF) military intelligence directorate, and Yanus was a strategic planning officer in the IDF. The company’s board is a who’s who of the Israeli intelligence and defense establishment, and includes:
- Meir Dagan (now deceased), former Mossad director
- Efraim Halevy, former Mossad director
- Yohanan Danino, former Israeli Police commissioner
- Major General Giora Eiland, former Israeli National Security Council chief
- Asher Tishler, dean of the College of Management Academic Studies, and consultant to the IDF
Black Cube’s international advisory board
Black Cube’s client list is long and controversial. The company was hired by US President Donald Trump’s aides in 2018 to undermine the Iran Nuclear Deal; worked for then-president of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Joseph Kabila, to spy on his political opponents; and spied on journalists investigating NSO Group – another Mossad-linked Israeli tech company, best known for its ‘Pegasus’ spyware.
Disgraced movie mogul Harvey Weinstein hired Black Cube in 2016 to silence and discredit numerous women accusing him of sexual abuse. Weinstein was encouraged to hire Black Cube by former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, a close associate of Jeffrey Epstein who co-founded Paragon Solutions, yet another spyware and surveillance company.
Israeli spy-tech infiltration of EU?
These examples illustrate the web of ties between Israel’s tech sector and its military, political, and intelligence establishment. Black Cube’s client list suggests that it will work for anyone willing to pay, but its recent activity in Slovenia points to a deeper alignment between the company and the goals of the Israeli state, and demonstrates the danger foreign clients face when they hire the company and others like it to do their dirty work.
Zorella, Eiland, and two other Black Cube employees arrived in Ljubljana in late December, where they met with former Prime Minister Janez Jansa, according to a report by the 8 March Institute, a liberal Slovenian NGO. Jansa, a conservative, was running for election against liberal Prime Minister Robert Golob at the time.
The purpose of the visit became clear in early March, when – just like in Cyprus – a series of covertly-recorded audio and video files hit social media. They showed associates of Golob’s Svoboda party discussing penny-ante corruption within the Slovenian government with undercover Black Cube employees posing as foreign investors. The officials bragged about their influence over the media, their connections to Golob, and their ability to offer access to the prime minister for a fee.
Jansa’s Slovenian Democratic Party (SDS) held the videos up as proof of corruption within Golob’s government, and the scandal almost won him the election. Ultimately, Svoboda beat SDS by a margin of only 0.67%.
Jansa initially denied, but later admitted to, meeting with Black Cube. He has not admitted to hiring the company, however. Slovenia’s Intelligence and Security Agency (SOVA) has since determined that Black Cube “intended to discredit individuals politically, which may pose a threat to national security and influence democratic elections.” SOVA added that “this interference was most likely commissioned from within Slovenia,” but it is still not completely clear by whom.
The Israeli government had a stake in the election. Under Golob, Slovenia has recognized the State of Palestine, banned the import of goods from illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank, and weighed joining South Africa’s genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Jansa, on the other hand, is a close ally of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and has equated recognition of a Palestinian state with “supporting the terrorist organization Hamas.”
Does Black Cube work for Israel?
Nobody has accused Israel of ordering Black Cube to intervene in the Cypriot election, but in this case, Netanyahu’s interests and the interests of the Cypriot opposition overlap.
Black Cube is one of many defense and intelligence startups filled with ‘former’ Israeli spooks and security chiefs. Although these companies are private, profit-making enterprises, their leaders are often more loyal to Israel than to the bottom line, as another example from Slovenia demonstrates.
Two weeks before the election, Golob’s government chose not to join the ICJ genocide case against Israel. Slovenian Foreign Minister Tanja Fajon told reporters that the government had no other option: “Many of the country’s cyber defense systems are of Israeli origin,” she explained, adding that to join the lawsuit “would jeopardize Slovenia’s national security.”
Fajon confirmed that she had been pressured into making this decision. “It is clear that these pressures exist, we are all subjected to them by superpowers, and ultimately this must be taken into account when deciding,” she said.
It is unclear whether the continuation of Black Cube’s campaign against Golob was a part of the pressure campaign, or whether Fajon was threatened by the Israeli state or the companies responsible for the country’s cyber defense systems. Regardless, the message is clear: Israeli companies are willing to interfere in EU elections, and by relying on Israeli technology, EU countries are trading sovereignty for security – neither of which they will get.
What is the EU doing about Israeli interference?
EU officials have used the most spurious claims of “Russian interference” to justify their own election meddling. RT has covered cases where Brussels-aligned actors have alleged, without basis, interference in Romania, Hungary, and Bulgaria.
However, when it comes to the activities of Black Cube in Cyprus and Slovenia, Brussels has stayed silent.
Slovenian authorities urged European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen to probe the company’s work in the runup to last month’s election, arguing that “such interference by a foreign private company poses a clear hybrid threat against the European Union and its Member States,” according to a letter published by Politico.
The commission has not even publicly acknowledged receiving the letter.
Yet there are far more cases of Black Cube and its ilk interfering in European elections. RT will look at these cases in depth over our ‘Wired for War’ series and ask, why is the EU so willing to ignore blatant meddling happening within its own borders?
Featured Video
House Resolution Calls for Tech Companies to Censor Speech
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
Book Review
Alarmist climate science as a textbook example of groupthink
By Paul MacRae | May 1, 2012
… Groupthink was extensively studied by Yale psychologist Irving L. Janis and described in his 1982 book Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes.
Janis was curious about how teams of highly intelligent and motivated people—the “best and the brightest” as David Halberstam called them in his 1972 book of the same name—could have come up with political policy disasters like the Vietnam War, Watergate, Pearl Harbor and the Bay of Pigs. Similarly, in 2008 and 2009, we saw the best and brightest in the world’s financial sphere crash thanks to some incredibly stupid decisions, such as allowing sub-prime mortgages to people on the verge of bankruptcy.
In other words, Janis studied why and how groups of highly intelligent professional bureaucrats and, yes, even scientists, screw up, sometimes disastrously and almost always unnecessarily. The reason, Janis believed, was “groupthink.” He quotes Nietzsche’s observation that “madness is the exception in individuals but the rule in groups,” and notes that groupthink occurs when “subtle constraints … prevent a [group] member from fully exercising his critical powers and from openly expressing doubts when most others in the group appear to have reached a consensus.”[2]
Janis found that even if the group leader expresses an openness to new ideas, group members value consensus more than critical thinking; groups are thus led astray by excessive “concurrence-seeking behavior.”[3] Therefore, Janis wrote, groupthink is “a model of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group, when the members’ strivings for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action.”[4]
The groupthink syndrome
The result is what Janis calls “the groupthink syndrome.” This consists of three main categories of symptoms:
1. Overestimate of the group’s power and morality, including “an unquestioned belief in the group’s inherent morality, inclining the members to ignore the ethical or moral consequences of their actions.” [emphasis added]
2. Closed-mindedness, including a refusal to consider alternative explanations and stereotyped negative views of those who aren’t part of the group’s consensus. The group takes on a “win-lose fighting stance” toward alternative views.[5]
3. Pressure toward uniformity, including “a shared illusion of unanimity concerning judgments conforming to the majority view”; “direct pressure on any member who expresses strong arguments against any of the group’s stereotypes”; and “the emergence of self-appointed mind-guards … who protect the group from adverse information that might shatter their shared complacency about the effectiveness and morality of their decisions.”[6]
It’s obvious that alarmist climate science—as explicitly and extensively revealed in the Climatic Research Unit’s “Climategate” emails—shares all of these defects of groupthink, including a huge emphasis on maintaining consensus, a sense that because they are saving the world, alarmist climate scientists are beyond the normal moral constraints of scientific honesty (“overestimation of the group’s power and morality”), and vilification of those (“deniers”) who don’t share the consensus. … Read full article
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Iran unveils new control measures over Strait of Hormuz transit
- House Resolution Calls for Tech Companies to Censor Speech
- Ceasefire no longer viable after 200 days of Israeli violations: Hamas
- Israeli strikes intensify across southern Lebanon, casualties reported
- Left in Disbelief: Israel in Panic over Hezbollah FPV Drone Nightmare
- Trump Taps Israel Lobbyist From Mossad Cutout FDD To Join Iran Negotiations
- Trump’s Blockade Snatches Defeat from the Jaws of Victory
- Geopolitics and Geoeconomics of the Strait of Hormuz
- Mali: a new front in the Western war on multipolarism
- CHD Scientist: CDC, FDA COVID Vaccine Safety Monitoring ‘Insulting, and Many People Are Injured’
- If Americans Knew
- Israel’s New Ambassador to the ‘Christian World’ Served as Envoy to Azerbaijan During the Ethnic Cleansing of Christians from Nagorno-Karabakh
- US set to sell $1B “Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System” to Israel – Daily Update
- Israeli Strikes Kill at Least 32 Across S Lebanon, Including Children – Amid “Ceasefire”
- Israel to pour $730m into propaganda arm amid reputational crisis
- Real Cost of Iran War Likely Double the $25 Billion Figure the Pentagon Gave to Congress
- Israel conducts farthest-ever strike in long history of attacks on Gaza humanitarian aid flotillas
- In Gaza, Israel commits 10+ ceasefire violations a day – Daily Update
- US ships 6,500 tons of munitions, equipment to Israel in 24 hours
- A New Library in Gaza Rises From the Ashes of Destruction
- Israel’s top Jewish religious body ‘refuses to condemn’ smashing of Jesus statue
- No Tricks Zone
- Wind Energy Is Toxic, Hazardous To Human Health, Scientific Review Shows
- Oversupply Of Volatile Solar Energy Leads To Record NEGATIVE Prices!
- New Study: Extreme Heat Records, Heatwaves, Extreme Cold Records Declining Across US Since 1899
- It’s The Cold, Stupid! Cold 20 Times More Lethal Than Heat, Multiple Studies Show
- European Institute For Climate And Energy: “Climate Debate is Seldom About Science”
- New Study: The Climate May Be 5 Times More Sensitive To Solar Forcing Than Commonly Assumed
- EV Industry Reached $70 Billion In Losses In 2024 Due To Delusional Green Ideologies
- Reality Check: Maldives Have Actually Grown In Size Or Remained Stable Over Recent Decades
- Abrupt Climate Change Also Occurred NATURALLY In The Past …25 Times During Last Ice Age
- Cave Discovery Reveals Today’s Desert Climates Were Recently Far Warmer, Wetter, Teeming With Life
Aletho News 