As Israel bans aid orgs in Gaza, notorious mercenary firm seeks “Targeter”
Are Israel and US planning to revive the dystopian GHF scheme that spawned famine and death under cover of humanitarian aid?

By Max Blumenthal | The Grayzone | December 31, 2025
In its bid to continue the genocide in Gaza, Israel has banned 37 international aid organizations from entering the decimated, militarily occupied coastal enclave. This leaves only five humanitarian groups still able to operate inside Gaza.
At the same time, one of the US mercenary firms responsible for securing the notorious Gaza Humanitarian Foundation sites which were present during the worst periods of famine in Gaza, when at least 3000 Palestinian civilians were gunned down while seeking aid, has posted an ad soliciting former special forces soldiers for offensive operations.
UG Solutions, the scandal-stained private mercenary firm, announced this December that it was hiring an “experienced Targeter to support intelligence-driven operations through the identification, development, validation, and maintenance of operational targets.” The targeter will be expected to “Develop, validate, and maintain operational target packages in accordance with approved targeting processes.”
Anthony Aguilar, the retired United States Army Lt. Col and former Green Beret who blew the whistle on UG Solutions’ human rights abuses in Gaza, told me he believes that Israel’s ban on the 37 international aid organizations signals the return of UG Solutions as part of a restructured version of the Israeli-controlled Gaza Humanitarian Foundation scheme.
While it’s unclear where the UG Solutions targeter position will be deployed, if they are being hired for upcoming operations in Gaza, Aguilar says “this shows that the US, through paramilitary contractors, is now going to either directly target, or feed target data to the IDF.”

To set the stage for its blanket ban on international aid organizations, Israel’s intel-tied Ministry of Diaspora Affairs has demanded that all staffers of aid NGOs prove they do not support calls to boycott Israel, that they do not support armed struggle or oppose Israel’s existence as an exclusivist Jewish state, and that they do not “actively advance delegitimization activities against the State of Israel.”
Aid staffers must also demonstrate that they have never questioned the established history of the Holocaust or challenged official Israeli narratives about October 7 – including, presumably, that Palestinians committed “mass rape” or beheaded babies.
Israel has also demanded that Doctors Without Borders provide COGAT occupation administrators with the personal data of its staff and donors, an unprecedented move by a belligerent in a conflict which few, if any, aid groups could ever honor.
It seems obvious that the Israeli government is using the absurdly onerous new registration standards as cover to ban virtually every credible international aid organization from entering Gaza. In doing so, the apartheid entity seemingly seeks to deprive Palestinians living inside the yellow occupation line of sustenance, forcing them to leave Gaza, or to move into one of the high-tech, concentration camp-like “smart cities” mapped out in the dystopian new “Project Sunrise” proposal marketed by Trump cronies Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner.
And it is there that they would be “secured” by a mercenary outfit like UG Solutions – and targeted if they dared to resist.
Below is a list of all the aid orgs banned by Israel from operating in Gaza:
1. Accion contra el Hambre – Action Against Hunger
2. Action Aid
3. Alianza por la Solidaridad
4. Artsen zonder Grenzen (Medecins Sans Frontieres Nederland)
5. Campaign for the Children of Palestine (CCP Japan)
6. CARE
7. DanChurchAid
8. Danish Refugee Council
9. Handicap International – Humanity and Inclusion
10. Japan International Volunteer center
11. Medecins Du Monde (FRANCE)
12. Medecins du Monde Switzerland
13. Medecins Sans Frontières Belgium
14. Medecins Sans Frontieres France
15. Medicos del Mundo (Spain)
16. Mercy Corps
17. MSF Spain – Doctors Without Borders Spain
18. NORWEGIAN REFUGEE COUNCIL
19. Oxfam Novib
20. Premiere Urgence Internationale
21. Terre des hommes Lausanne
22. The International Rescue Committee (IRC)
23. WeWorld-GVC
24. World Vision International
25. Relief International
26. Fondazione AVSI
27. Movement for Peace – MPDL
28. American Friends Service Committee (AFSC)
29. Medico International
30. PSAS – The Palestine Solidarity Association in Sweden
31. Defense for Children International
32. Medical Aid for Palestinians – UK
33. Caritas Internationalis
34. Caritas Jerusalem
35. Near East council churches
36. OXFAM Quebec
37. War Child holland
Welcome To 2026: Europe Laying Groundwork For Climate Science Censorship!
By P Gosselin | No Tricks Zone | December 31, 2025
As EU narratives collapse, desparate leaders are planning more tyrannical measures to keep it all from sinking.
Currently, EU leaders are fuming that US officials would be so audacious as to accuse them of practicing censorship. Yet, when it comes to suppressing open discussions and differing viewpoints on major issues, things are in fact worse than most people think. And, it’s about to get even worse.
A recent (indirectly EU-funded) report released earlier this year shows how the EU is planning to broaden censorship to include the topics of climate and energy science.
In the “Harmful Environmental Agendas and Tactics” (HEAT) report, published by EU DisinfoLab and Logically, its authors investigate how climate-related misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation (MDM) are strategically used to undermine climate policy in Europe, specifically in Germany, France, and the Netherlands.
Climate science skeptics threaten democracy
The report argues that climate disinformation has moved beyond simple science denial and has become a tool for broader political and social polarization.
Outright denial of climate change, the authors claim, is being replaced by narratives focused on “climate delay.” These often acknowledge climate change but attack the feasibility, cost, and fairness of solutions, e.g., they claim green policies will bankrupt households or destroy industries.
The enemies
The report identifies four main pillars driving these agendas:
- The Conspiracy Milieu: Distrust of elites and “deep state” narratives (e.g., the “Great Reset”).
- Culture War/Partisan Discourse: Framing climate action as an authoritarian or elitist project.
- Hostile State Actors (HSAs): Significant involvement of Russian-linked networks (e.g., Portal Kombat) that use localized domains like Pravda DE to amplify divisive climate content.
- Big Oil Alignment: Narratives that align with fossil fuel interests, even if direct corporate attribution is often obscured.
In Germany, for example, there are attacks on the Energiewende (energy transition) and the Building Heating Act.
In France, there are links between climate policy and the “Yellow Vest” movement or anti-elitist sentiments.
Meanwhile, the “nitrogen crisis” has been reframed as “government land theft” in the Netherlands.
European leaders are convinced that their policies have nothing to do with all the failure going on. In their eyes, it’s all the fault of unruly citizens and their disinfoarmtion campaigns.
The report’s key recommendations
The authors call for decisive institutional and platform-level action to treat climate disinformation as a structural threat and a danger to democracy. This all needs to stop!
Platforms must act!
The primary recommendation is for the EU to explicitly recognize climate disinformation as a systemic risk under the Digital Services Act (a.k.a. by critics the Digital Censorship Act). This would force so-called Very Large Online Platforms (VLOPs) to take proactive measures and conduct risk assessments.
The authors also call for mandating algorithm audits and public reporting on content moderation, specifically for climate content. It’s time to crack down on skeptics, they say.
“Independent” auditors
Moreover “independent researchers” are to be provided with access to disaggregated platform data to track how these narratives spread.
Another recommendation is calling for the labelling and limiting the reach of “ideological or sponsored” climate disinformation.
“Trusted flaggers”
The authors also are calling for greater monitoring of Russian-aligned and other hostile state operations that exploit climate debates to weaken EU democratic resilience.
Another step suggested to counter “climate disinformation” is the establishment of reporting channels for civil society organizations (so-called “trusted flaggers”) to flag coordinated inauthentic behavior (CIB) and harmful narratives to regulators.
“Prebunking”
Also “prebunking” campaigns aimed at proactively educating the public on disinformation tactics before they are exposed to them—especially in lower-educated rural and working-class areas that are frequently targeted.
The new German totalitarianism
The German liberal order resorts to totalitarianism to preserve the hegemony of its elites
By Raphael Machado | Strategic Culture Foundation | December 30, 2025
Mentioning “totalitarianism” in Germany quickly forces our minds to associate it with the Nazi period in that country’s history. 12 years during which Germany was under the command of Hitler and his party; a command that culminated in the Second World War and the greatest military hecatomb in human history. Indeed, historically, and thanks to figures like Hannah Arendt, the political category of “totalitarianism” has been restricted to the manifestations of illiberal political theories, such as fascism and communism. Liberalism, on the other hand, could not, it never could, it could never be totalitarian; that would be a “contradiction in terms.”
However, a closer look would quickly point out that many post-war Western philosophers, particularly Jewish ones like Karl Popper and Theodor Adorno, in dealing with attempts to understand Germany’s fascist turn, argued that legalistic concerns would have prevented the state from removing from the political game a political force, like Nazism, which very obviously intended to liquidate democracy and, therefore, put an end to the political game as such. This is the so-called “paradox of tolerance.” Popper, from the right, and Adorno, from the left, both agree in defending that the liberal-democratic state must be intolerant towards the “intolerant”; that is, to pursue, silence, and liquidate, without formalist concerns, any figure or political group that openly opposes the fundamental values of liberal democracy and human rights.
Very obviously, we can see that this is an attempt to philosophically legitimize the establishment of a totalitarian regime under the justification of defending “democracy” against fascists and/or communists. Despite its specific emphasis on rational deliberation, even Jürgen Habermas, the philosophical “pope” of German democratic liberalism, places the enemies of liberal society outside the umbrella of tolerant society, insofar as, if tolerated, they themselves would lead to the end of tolerant society.
The evident risk, nonetheless, lies in the decision that designates a figure, group, or ideology as “contrary to the liberal system.” In the 21st century, neither in Germany nor anywhere else in Europe, is there a serious and grave threat of the rise of openly fascist or communist political groups. Thus, at every moment, it is necessary to make a judgment about the possibility of an analogy between each political challenge to the existing order and the historical anti-liberal ideologies.
Since the definitions of fascism and communism are obviously imprecise (each theorist, each academic, etc., has their own definition of these ideologies), accusing an opponent of being “fascist” or “communist” is easy. And with that, it becomes possible to construct the possibility of silencing and excluding the opponent from the public sphere.
The German state, therefore, has all the necessary theoretical foundation to justify the persecution of citizens who oppose its designs and values.
And now it has the technical and legal means to discover who all the “enemies of tolerant society” are among its citizens.
In December 2025, the Berlin House of Representatives passed an amendment to the General Law on Security and Public Order that significantly expands state surveillance capabilities. The amendment introduces several tools that are, to say the least, controversial, such as authorizing police forces to install spyware on the smartphones and computers of “suspicious” citizens, as well as to intercept encrypted communications. If these actions are not feasible remotely, the new regulations allow police forces to secretly break into citizens’ homes to install the spyware physically.
Another innovation is the possibility for police forces to access traffic data from cell towers for all devices in a specific area and moment, without the need for specific judicial authorization. With this, the police could map the movements of any citizen during protests and public events. Furthermore, the legislation also authorizes the collected data to be used for training artificial intelligence systems.
This is a clear institutional slide toward totalitarianism. It is impossible to twist the narrative to deny, therefore, the possibility of liberalism also degenerating into totalitarianism, just as this possibility is recognized for fascism and communism. However, the regulations in question will only apply to the state of Berlin; it is not a change at the federal level.
But it may only be a matter of time. A similar bill is advancing in the Bundestag that promotes mass monitoring at the federal level, with the possibility of chat controls, weakening encryption, and digital and physical invasions of citizens’ property.
This intensification of state surveillance is no coincidence. It appears at a time when the legitimacy of the German liberal republic is being questioned by its citizens, disheartened by the achievements of recent decades, mass immigration, rising violence, and a clear effort by the government to push its citizens into a conflict with Russia. Questioned and under the threat of the rise of anti-system political forces, the German liberal order resorts to totalitarianism to preserve the hegemony of its elites.
UNRWA head slams ‘outrageous’ Israeli law to cut water, energy to agency’s facilities
Press TV – December 30, 2025
The head of the UN agency for Palestinian refugees has strongly slammed new Israeli legislation to cut water and energy to UNRWA facilities, calling it a violation of international law and a direct challenge to the United Nations system.
Philippe Lazzarini, Commissioner-General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), said legislation passed by Israel’s Knesset (Parliament) to cut energy and communication lines of the agency undermines the agency’s mandate.
“Yesterday’s vote by the Israeli parliament passing new legislation against UNRWA is outrageous,” Lazzarini wrote Tuesday on X.
“It is a direct affront to the mandate granted to the Agency by the UN General Assembly and contrary to findings of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which oblige Israel to fulfil its responsibilities as a UN Member State to UNRWA and the broader UN system.”
According to Lazzarini, the law authorizes Israeli authorities to cut water, electricity, fuel and communications to UNRWA facilities and allows for the expropriation of UN property in occupied East al-Quds, including the agency’s headquarters and its main vocational training centre.
He added that the bill explicitly excludes UNRWA from Israeli legislation implementing Israel’s obligations under the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, describing this as “a clear violation” of the Israeli regime’s obligations under international law.
Lazzarini said the move builds on laws passed last year and implemented since January 2025 that banned UNRWA’s operations in occupied East al-Quds and halted all contact between Israeli officials and the agency. He described the legislation as part of a sustained effort to weaken multilateral institutions.
“The new legislation is a further blow to the multilateral system,” he said, adding that it was part of “an ongoing, systematic campaign to discredit UNRWA and thereby obstruct the core role that the Agency plays in providing human-development assistance and services to Palestine Refugees.”
Those services, Lazzarini noted, have been deemed essential by the ICJ for upholding the UN’s commitment to Palestinian rights, including self-determination.
He recalled that in October the court reiterated Israel’s obligation under international law to facilitate, not hinder, UNRWA’s work, calling the new law “an unacceptable rejection of the ICJ’s findings.”
Lazzarini said disputes with UNRWA should be addressed through UN mechanisms, warning against unilateral actions. He pointed to recent incidents on the ground, including the storming of UNRWA’s compound in East al-Quds earlier this month, when Israeli officials tore down the UN flag and replaced it with an Israeli one. In May, he said, authorities forced the closure of UNRWA schools in the city, affecting hundreds of Palestinian refugee children.
“These legislative steps have been accompanied by unilateral actions on the ground that show a repeated disregard for international law,” he said.
Lazzarini warned that the measures are having a direct operational and legal impact on UNRWA’s work across the occupied Palestinian territory, including Gaza, where the agency is central to humanitarian operations.
He stressed that Palestinian refugee rights exist independently of UNRWA under international law and UN resolutions, including Resolution 194, and would endure even without the agency.
He added that the legislation sets a “grave precedent” by rejecting the UN’s independence and immunities, cautioning that failing to push back could undermine humanitarian and human rights work worldwide.
Israel has banned UNRWA from operating in the occupied territories after accusing some of its staff of being involved in the al-Aqsa storm operation in October 2023.
Despite repeated requests from UNRWA for the Israeli regime to provide evidence supporting its allegations, the agency has received no response.
The UN agency has faced deepening financial turmoil since Israel launched a defamation campaign against it.
Netanyahu Aligned Think Tanker: Somaliland Offered To ‘Absorb’ One Million Palestinians
New Evidence That Israel’s Recognition Of Somaliland Was To Further Ethnic Cleansing Of Gaza
The Dissident | December 29, 2025
On a December 28th twitter space called “Israel’s Historic Recognition of Somaliland”, Dan Diker, the president of the Benjamin Netanyahu aligned Israeli think tank, “Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs” gave further evidence that Israel’s recognition of “Somaliland”, a breakaway region of Somalia was done to use the region as a dumping ground for ethnically cleansed Palestinians in Gaza.
In the space, Diker was asked, “What did you think was the main reason for Israel to break with this usual line of the international community (and recognize Somaliland) and be the first to do so?”
In response, one of the reasons Diker gave was, “I do know that our friends in Somaliland made a very generous offer privately and in the last, I would say in the last months, it even reached the desk of the President of the United States, of their willingness to absorb or to create communities for hundreds of thousands even beyond a million up to a million and half Gazans”.
Dan Diker added, “Somaliland, in our understanding, is really the only country, now country, that stepped up to the plate to absorb Gazans… Somaliland’s offer can make a very important contribution to the stability of Gaza for those who choose to stay in Gaza and for those who choose to rebuild their lives in another country”.
Previously, the Israeli newspaper, The Jerusalem Post, reported that “Somaliland Foreign Minister, Abdirahman Dahir Adan, “does not rule out absorbing Gazan residents,” but said that, “the most important thing for us is to receive recognition”.
The Israeli newspaper Ynet also reported that, “The territory (Somaliland) has recently been mentioned as a possible destination for Gazans, with officials there saying they would be willing to absorb ‘one million Gazans,’ though no formal agreement has been announced.”
Now Dan Diker confirmed that Somaliland agreed to “absorb” up to “a million and a half Gazans” and was, “the only country, now country, that stepped up to the plate to absorb Gazans,” which was one of the main reasons Israel was the first UN member sate to recognize the breakaway region as a country.
After Israel announced its recognition of Somaliland, the Israeli journalist Amit Segal boasted that, “Somaliland was supposed to — and may still — absorb Gazans”.
Trump, at his latest press conference with Netanyahu claimed that if given the chance “half of Gaza would leave,” signalling support for Israel’s ethnic cleansing plan.
Israel has framed its ethnic cleansing plan in Gaza as “voluntary migration”, but as Gila Gamliel, Israel’s current Science and Technology Minister admitted, Israel’s actual goal is to “make the Gaza Strip uninhabitable until the population leaves”.
While Israel continues to make Gaza “uninhabitable until the population leaves”, their recognition of Somaliland appears to be the first move in creating a territory to send ethnically cleansed Palestinians from Gaza.
WHO Instructs Governments to Track Online Anti-Vaccine Messaging in Real Time with AI: Journal ‘Vaccines’
Believe in vaccines or be targeted
By Jon Fleetwood | December 29, 2025
The World Health Organization (WHO) has demanded that governments surveil online information that questions the legitimacy of influenza vaccines and that they launch “countermeasures” against those who question the WHO’s vaccine dogma, in a November Vaccines journal publication.
The WHO’s largest funders are the U.S. government (taxpayers) and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
In the November publication, the WHO representatives do not argue for their beliefs in vaccines.
They do not attempt to interact with arguments against vaccines.
Instead, they call for governments to use artificial intelligence (AI) to monitor online opposition to injectable pharmaceuticals, and to develop ways to combat such opposition.
There is no persuasion, only doctrine.
The WHO paper reads:
“Vaccine effectiveness is contingent on public acceptance, making risk communication and community engagement (RCCE) an integral component of preparedness. The research agenda calls for the design of tailored communication strategies that address local sociocultural contexts, linguistic diversity, and trust dynamics.”
“Digital epidemiology tools, such as AI-driven infodemic monitoring systems like VaccineLies and CoVaxLies, offer real-time insight into misinformation trends, enabling proactive countermeasures.”
The WHO starts from the assumption that all vaccine skepticism is inherently false, pushing surveillance tools to track and catalog online dissent from those rejecting that creed.
The goal is not finding middle ground or even fostering dialogue.
It’s increasing vaccinations.
“The engagement of high-exposure occupational groups as trusted messengers is recommended to improve uptake.”
To accomplish this, governments “should” align “all” their messaging with the WHO’s denomination of vaccine faith.
“All messaging should align with WHO’s six communication principles, ensuring information is Accessible, Actionable, Credible, Relevant, Timely, and Understandable, to strengthen public trust in vaccination programmes.”
The WHO’s faith system requires not only that its own followers but also non-followers inject themselves with drugs linked to injuries, diseases, hospitalizations, and deaths.
If your posts online oppose that faith system, they are targeted and labeled as “misinformation.”
You require “behavioural intervention.”
You must be “counter[ed].”
“Beyond monitoring misinformation, participatory communication models that involve local leaders, healthcare workers, and veterinarians have shown measurable improvements in vaccine uptake and trust. Evidence-based behavioural interventions can complement these approaches to counter misinformation.”
The WHO is outlining an Orwellian control system where dissent is pathologized, belief is enforced by surveillance, and governments are instructed to algorithmically police thought in service of pharmaceutical compliance.
Ireland’s Simon Harris to Push EU-Wide Ban on Social Media Anonymity
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | December 29, 2025
Ireland’s next term leading the European Union will be used to promote a new agenda: an effort to end online anonymity and make verified identity the standard across social media platforms.
Tánaiste Simon Harris said the government plans to use Ireland’s presidency to push for EU-wide rules that would require users to confirm their identities before posting or interacting online.
Speaking to Extra.ie, Harris described the plan as part of a broader attempt to defend what he called “democracy” from anonymous abuse and digital manipulation.
He said the initiative will coincide with another policy being developed by Media Minister Patrick O’Donovan, aimed at preventing children from accessing social media.
O’Donovan’s proposal, modeled on Australian restrictions, is expected to be introduced while Ireland holds the EU presidency next year.
Both ideas would involve rewriting parts of the EU’s Digital Services Act, which already governs how online platforms operate within the bloc.
Expanding it to require verified identities would mark a major shift toward government involvement in online identity systems, a move that many privacy advocates believe could expose citizens to new forms of monitoring and limit open speech.
Harris said his motivation comes from concerns about the health of public life, not personal grievance.
Harris said he believes Ireland will find allies across Europe for the initiative.
He pointed to recent statements from French President Emmanuel Macron and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who he said have shown interest in following Australia’s lead. “If you look at the comments of Emmanuel Macron… of Keir Starmer… recently, in terms of being open to considering what Australia have done… You know this is a global conversation Ireland will and should be a part of,” he said.
Technology companies based in Ireland, many of which already face scrutiny under existing EU rules, are likely to resist further regulation.
The United States government has also expressed growing hostility toward European efforts to regulate speech on its major tech firms, recently imposing visa bans on several EU officials connected to such laws.
Despite this, Harris said Ireland does not want confrontation. “This is a conversation we want to have now. We don’t want to have it in an adversarial way. Companies require certainty too, right?” he said, emphasizing that Ireland remains committed to being a reliable home for international tech firms.
He also spoke in support of O’Donovan’s age-verification proposal, comparing it to other legal age limits already enforced in Ireland. “We have a digital age of consent in Ireland, which is 16, but it’s simply not being enforced,” he said.
From a civil liberties standpoint, mandatory identity checks could fundamentally alter the online world.
Requiring proof of identity to speak publicly risks silencing individuals who rely on anonymity for safety, including whistleblowers, activists, and those living under political pressure.
Once created, systems of digital identity are rarely dismantled and can easily be adapted to track or restrict speech.
Harris said that voluntary cooperation by technology companies could make legislation unnecessary. “These companies are technology companies. They have the ability to do more, without the need for laws,” he said, suggesting platforms could use their own tools to manage bots, algorithms, and age verification.
Italy arrests Palestinian activist amid crackdown on anti-Israel voices

Palestinian activist Mohammed Hannoun
Press TV – December 28, 2025
Italian authorities have detained prominent Palestinian activist Mohammed Hannoun as European countries mount a crackdown on voices exposing Israel’s genocidal crimes against the oppressed nation.
Hannoun, president of the Palestinian Association in Italy, was arrested along with eight other people on Saturday for allegedly financing the Palestinian Hamas resistance group through charities.
In a statement, prosecutors claimed that the activist is the “head of the Italian cell of the Hamas organization.”
They also alleged that the suspects had sent about 7 million euros ($8.2 million) to “associations … owned, controlled, or linked to Hamas.”
However, Hannoun’s lawyer Fabio Sommovigo said that the funds were collected peacefully for humanitarian purposes, adding that the case was based on the Israeli authorities’ interpretation of money movements.
Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, who has faced backlash for her pro-Israel stance during the regime’s genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, expressed her “appreciation and satisfaction” for the arrest operation.
Born in Jordan in 1962, Hannoun has been residing in the Italian port city of Genoa for many years.
He is an architect by profession and has organized and taken part in public demonstrations, solidarity initiatives, and awareness campaigns in support of the Palestinian cause.
He had previously described Hamas as a legitimate political actor, saying, “I am simply a Palestinian who has been engaged for decades in the struggle for the rights of his people. Hamas received more than 70 percent of the vote in Gaza and the West Bank, so it is a legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. And I am a sympathizer of Hamas, just as I am of every faction that fights for my rights.”
The arrests come at a time when certain European countries have stepped up efforts to silence pro-Palestinian activists and groups through judicial proceedings, forced dissolutions, and account freezes.
The same European states are complicit in Israel’s war crimes as they maintain their economic and military ties with the criminal regime, which has killed 71,266 Palestinians, mostly women and children, in Gaza since October 7, 2023.
NSW Premier Admits New “Security” Bill Restricts Civil Liberties, Promises More “Hate Speech” Laws Ahead
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | December 27, 2025
Lawmakers in New South Wales wrapped up the year by rushing through security legislation that broadens police powers and imposes new limits on protest activity and expression.
Passed in an extraordinary sitting of Parliament just before Christmas, the Terrorism and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 represents one of the most far-reaching state security expansions in recent years.
Under the new law, the display of a symbol belonging to a “prohibited terrorist organization” can now lead to a prison term of up to two years.
Police officers are also granted authority to order individuals to remove face coverings if they are attending a demonstration or public event and the officer “reasonably suspects” they may commit an offense.
The legislation also permits police to halt public gatherings in the aftermath of a terrorist attack.
Although the bill is not framed as a censorship measure, it introduces powers that could intersect with the expanding use of surveillance technologies.
By compelling people to show their faces during political demonstrations, the law effectively weakens the ability of citizens to shield themselves from biometric tracking at a time when facial recognition systems are increasingly used by both law enforcement and private entities.
Premier Chris Minns has openly acknowledged that the law curtails individual freedoms. “These are extraordinary measures, I acknowledge that. I know that not all Australians that live in NSW support these changes, but we have decided it’s the best way of ensuring we do everything possible to keep the people of NSW safe,” he said following the bill’s passage.
Minns further conceded that the process was accelerated, crediting bipartisan cooperation for allowing the legislation to pass so quickly. “I know that that happened in a short space of time. I know that the negotiations and the talks had to happen over a short space of time, but we appreciate the goodwill in which we were able to get much-needed reform in New South Wales through the Parliament,” he stated.
He justified the timing by saying, “We couldn’t wait, this was urgent.”
When pressed about why the measures were bundled into a single omnibus bill, Minns admitted that time was the deciding factor. “If it had been cut up into its component parts, we would have been here way past Christmas… maybe people who oppose elements of those changes would have loved that, because it would have meant that the passage of the bills would have been stalled.”
The Premier did not shy away from admitting that rights were being limited in the process. “I accept, I guess, the implicit criticism that this does restrict rights, whether it’s for protests or guns,” he said. “But in these circumstances, we’ve got a higher obligation to the public… our number one obligation is to keep the public safe.”
Minns also signaled that more legislation is on the horizon, confirming that the government intends to introduce new “hate speech” laws in the coming months. “I want to make it clear that this isn’t the end of change… we’re currently looking at other areas of the law that are urgently required to confront hate speech, confront Islamist terrorism in our community,” he said. “Hate speech leads to hateful actions… and we’re prepared to take action and steps to keep the community safe.”
While the Premier frames the agenda as necessary to safeguard citizens, the process reflects a deeper shift toward governance by emergency.
Parliament’s decision to fast-track legal powers during a holiday recess, without full debate or public review, raises serious questions about transparency and proportionality.
The rapid normalization of police discretion over identity and assembly carries lasting implications for privacy and dissent.
As soon as governments assert the right to define and control “hate speech” or to compel identification at protests, the boundaries of lawful expression narrow quickly. A response to terrorism may end up reshaping the basic relationship between the individual and the state.
More: Victoria Moves to Force Online Platforms to ID Users and Expand State Powers to Curb “Hate Speech”
US Under Secretary of State Slams UK and EU Over Online Speech Regulation, Announces Release of Files on Past Censorship Efforts
By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | December 27, 2025
American Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy Sarah Rogers has sharply criticized British and European speech regulators for attempting to extend their laws to US-based platforms, calling it a direct challenge to the First Amendment.
Speaking during an appearance on The Liz Truss Show, Rogers said Washington intends to respond to the UK’s communications regulator Ofcom after it sought to bring the website 4chan under its jurisdiction.
She said the situation “forced” the US to defend its constitutional protections, warning that “when British regulators decree that British law applies to American speech on American sites on American soil with no connection to Britain,” the matter can no longer be ignored.
Rogers called it “a perverse blessing” that the dispute is forcing a renewed transatlantic conversation about free expression, observing that “Britain and America did develop the free speech tradition together.”
Rogers announced that the State Department will soon publish a collection of previously unreleased internal emails and documents describing earlier US government involvement in social media moderation efforts.
The release is part of what she termed a “truth and reconciliation initiative” that will include material linked to the now-defunct Global Engagement Center, which she said had coordinated with outside organizations to identify content for takedown.
That operation was “immediately dismantled” after she assumed her current post.
She argued that foreign governments have moved from cooperation to coercion in their dealings with US companies. “Europe and the UK and other governments abroad are… trying to nullify the American First Amendment by enforcing against American companies and American speakers and American soil,” Rogers said, referring to the EU’s fine against X and Ofcom’s recent enforcement campaigns.
On domestic policy, she criticized the UK’s Online Safety Act, saying that it is being sold as child protection legislation but in practice functions as a speech control measure.
“These statutes are just censoring adult political speech is not the best way to protect kids and it’s probably the worst way,” she said.
Rogers noted that under such laws, even parliamentary remarks about criminal networks could be censored if regulators deem them harmful.
Turning to Ofcom’s ongoing 4chan case, Rogers said its legal position effectively claims authority over purely American websites.
She offered a hypothetical: “I could go set up a website in my garage… about American political controversies… and Ofcom’s legal position nonetheless is that if I run afoul of British content laws, then I have to pay money for the British government.”
Rogers said she expects the US government to issue a response soon.
Throughout the interview, Rogers framed the current wave of global online regulation as an effort to suppress what she called “chaotic speech” that emerges with every major communications shift.
“People panic and they want to shove that innovation back in the bottle,” she said, warning that such attempts have “never worked.”
Her remarks mark one of the strongest rebukes yet from a senior American official toward the growing European model of compelled content moderation.
Rogers suggested that this model not only undermines open debate but also sets a precedent for governments worldwide to police political speech beyond their borders.
More: EU Launches New Push For Digital ID Age Checks and Big Tech Probe Under Digital Services Act
What Is Actually Behind Israel’s Recognition Of Somaliland?

The Dissident | December 27, 2025
Recently, Israel became the first country to recognize Somaliland, a breakaway region of Somalia that declared independence in 1991 but until now has not been officially recognized by any UN member state.
But what is Israel’s real motive behind this move?
One motive appears to be the fact that Israel has taken part in negotiations with Somaliland to use the region as a place to relocate Palestinians ethnically cleansed from Gaza by Israel.
The Israeli newspaper Ynet, writing about Israel’s Recognition Of Somaliland, noted that, “The territory has recently been mentioned as a possible destination for Gazans, with officials there saying they would be willing to absorb ‘one million Gazans,’ though no formal agreement has been announced.”
Israeli journalist Amit Segal wrote, “Israel announced today its official recognition of Somaliland as an independent, sovereign state, in a joint declaration signed by the leaders and in the spirit of the Abraham Accords,” and went on to boast that “Somaliland was supposed to — and may still — absorb Gazans.”
A report from the Financial Times from March of this year reported that during a meeting with U.S. officials and leaders of Somaliland, “Washington had raised the possibility of relocating refugees from the US and Gaza”, adding that, “Israel was ‘in conversations’ with countries around the world, including in Africa, about taking in Gazans”.
An August report from the Times of Israel wrote that, “Israel is in talks with five countries — Indonesia, Somaliland, Uganda, South Sudan and Libya — about the potential resettlement of Palestinians from the Gaza Strip” and added, “‘Some of the countries are showing greater openness than before to accepting voluntary immigration from the Gaza Strip,’ a diplomatic source tells the outlet, naming Indonesia and Somaliland in particular.”
It noted that, “Somaliland is a breakaway region of Somalia that is reportedly hoping to secure international recognition through the deal.”
Previously, the Israeli newspaper, The Jerusalem Post, reported that Somaliland Foreign Minister, Abdirahman Dahir Adan, “does not rule out absorbing Gazan residents” but said that, “the most important thing for us is to receive recognition”, signalling that Somaliland would agree to Israel’s ethnic cleansing plan in exchange for recognition Of Somaliland.
Journalist Kit Klarenberg noted that forcibly sending Palestinians from Gaza into Somaliland would amount to forcing them “in yet another open air concentration camp”, noting that, “In late 2022, mass protests broke out in the contested Somalian city of Las Anod. Somaliland security forces crushed the upheaval using lethal force, leaving dozens dead” and adding that, “Somaliland’s appeal to Israel and its Western puppet masters as a dumping ground for Gazans is obvious. A well-armed repressive domestic security apparatus stands ever-ready to brutally quell any and all local resistance”.
Furthermore, Israel’s recognition of Somaliland will be a strategic boost to Israel’s war against Yemen’s Ansar Allah, or the Houthis, the resistance militia, which had put a naval blockade on Israeli ships in the Red Sea, in an attempt to force Israel to end the genocide in Gaza.
Mark Dubowitz, an official with the Neo-con think tank “Foundation for Defense of Democracies,” boasted that Israel’s recognition of Somaliland will aid their war on Yemen, writing, “For those mocking why Israel would engage Somaliland: look at the map. Somaliland sits on the Gulf of Aden, next to the Bab el-Mandeb—a chokepoint for global trade and energy. Across the water are Iran-backed Houthis firing on Israel and shipping. Somaliland offers stability, ports, intelligence access, and a non-Iranian platform on the Red Sea. Similar reason why the U.S. has a military base in Djibouti.”
The Israeli newspaper Ynet reported that, Israel, “has strong strategic interest in Somaliland due to its long coastline and location in the Horn of Africa, close to Yemen” adding that, “One reason Israel has taken a keen interest in Somaliland is its proximity to areas controlled by Yemen’s Houthi rebels … Strengthening ties with Somaliland is viewed in Israel as a potential force multiplier against the Houthis”.
The outlet wrote that, “Somaliland lies near the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, a key global shipping lane. Amid clashes between Israel and the Houthis following the war in Gaza, and against the backdrop of a US operation against the Houthis this year, waters near Yemen have become a danger zone for commercial vessels … Somaliland’s Port of Berbera, about 250 kilometers south of Yemen, is considered strategically significant in this context”.
Another article in Ynet reported that, “Israeli intelligence officials say the Mossad has been active in Somaliland for years, laying the groundwork for the recognition through long-standing, discreet relationships with senior figures there. Mossad chiefs have maintained personal ties with Somaliland officials, and Israeli officials hope the agreement will encourage additional countries to pursue strategic relations with Israel as part of a broader regional alignment” because, “One key factor driving Israel’s interest is Somaliland’s proximity to areas controlled by the Houthis in Yemen” adding that, “Strengthening ties with Somaliland is seen in Israel as a strategic force multiplier against the Houthis.”
Reports in Israeli media show that Israel’s real motive behind recognition of Somaliland is to ethnically cleanse Palestinians in Gaza, and to have a strategic boost to its war against the Houthis, one of the only forces left willing to fight in solidarity with Palestinians.

