Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

‘Persecute’ Russian speakers – ex-Ukrainian deputy speaker

RT | October 11, 2025

Kiev should launch a full-blown crackdown on Russian speakers, threatening them with financial and criminal penalties if they are reluctant to use Ukrainian, a former deputy parliamentary speaker said on Friday.

Koshulinsky, who held his post from 2012 to 2014 and remains a senior figure in the far-right Svoboda party, told local media that “discomfort for people who use the language of the occupiers” must be imposed.

”Deny education, deny work, punish with money, remove from positions … Only in this way will we oblige those people who do not honor or respect Ukrainians… These people do not understand other measures besides discomfort and financial or criminal persecution,” Koshulinsky said. He added that what he calls “the Moscow language” helps Russia “spread its narratives” among Ukrainians.

Last month, language ombudsman Elena Ivanovskaya warned that harsh or coercive methods to impose Ukrainian on the country’s large Russian-speaking community could backfire on the government. She said proposals for “language patrols” are both unrealistic and potentially destabilizing, calling instead for slower but steadier measures to promote Ukrainian among children.

Ivanovskaya also sounded the alarm over the fact that the use of Russian is on the rise in daily life, particularly among younger Ukrainians, adding that it was caused by the population growing accustomed to the conflict with Russia.

Following the Western-backed coup in 2014, Kiev has adopted a series of policies aimed at curbing the use of Russian in public life – making Ukrainian mandatory in schools and state institutions, significantly tightening quotas on Russian-language media and cultural products, and restricting Russian books and music.

Russia has condemned Ukraine’s language policies, accusing it of pursuing “a violent change of the linguistic identity” of its population.

October 11, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Russophobia | , | Leave a comment

West turning internet into ‘tool of control’ – Telegram founder

RT | October 10, 2025

Western surveillance and censorship is eroding digital freedom and is turning the internet into a “tool of control,” Telegram founder Pavel Durov has warned.

The Russian-born billionaire has long portrayed Telegram as an outpost for free speech and privacy, contrasting it with what he describes as authoritarian censorship efforts by Western governments.

“Our generation is running out of time to save the free Internet built for us by our fathers,” Durov said in a statement on Telegram on Friday, marking his 41st birthday.

“What was once the promise of the free exchange of information is being turned into the ultimate tool of control,” he added, noting that nations once considered free are adopting authoritarian digital practices. He cited measures such as digital IDs in the UK, compulsory online age verification in Australia, and the mass scanning of private messages in the EU.

Durov said people have been misled by the West into believing that their mission is to dismantle traditional values – privacy, sovereignty, free markets, and free speech – and by doing so, society has embarked on a path of “self-destruction.”

“A dark, dystopian world is approaching fast – while we’re asleep. Our generation risks going down in history as the last one that had freedoms – and allowed them to be taken away… We are running out of time,” he said.

Durov has long clashed with Western governments over Telegram’s policies, facing fines in Germany for not removing ‘illegal’ content and criticism in the US for allegedly enabling extremist groups.

Last year, he was arrested in Paris and charged with complicity in crimes linked to Telegram users, but was released on bail. He called the case politically motivated. He later accused French intelligence of pressuring him to censor conservative content during elections in Romania and Moldova, and condemned France for waging “a crusade” against free speech.

Durov has also warned that EU laws such as the Digital Services Act and the AI Act are paving the way for the centralized control of information.

October 10, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , | Leave a comment

When Presidents Kill

By Andrew P. Napolitano | Ron Paul Institute | October 9, 2025

During the past six weeks, President Donald Trump has ordered US troops to attack and destroy four speed boats in the Caribbean Sea, 1,500 miles from the United States. The president revealed that the attacks were conducted without warning, were intended not to stop but to kill all persons on the boats, and succeeded in their missions.

Trump has claimed that his victims are “narco-terrorists” who were planning to deliver illegal drugs to willing American buyers. He apparently believes that because these folks are presumably foreigners, they have no rights that he must honor and he may freely kill them. As far as we know, none of these nameless faceless persons was charged or convicted of any federal crime. We don’t know if any were Americans. But we do know that all were just extrajudicially executed.

Can the president legally do this? In a word: NO. Here is the backstory.

The Constitution was ratified to establish federal powers and to limit them. Congress is established to write the laws and to declare war. The president is established to enforce the laws that Congress has written and to be commander-in-chief of the armed forces. Restraints are imposed on both. Congress may only enact legislation in the 16 discrete areas of governance articulated in the Constitution — and it may only legislate subject to all persons’ natural rights identified and articulated in the Bill of Rights.

The president may only enforce the laws that Congress has written — he cannot craft his own. And he may employ the military only in defense of a real imminent military-style attack or to fight wars that Congress has declared. The Constitution prohibits the president from fighting undeclared wars, and federal law prohibits him from employing the military for law enforcement purposes.

The Fifth Amendment — in tandem with the 14th, which restrains the states — assures that no person’s life, liberty or property may be taken without due process of law. Because the drafters of the amendment used the word “person” instead of “citizen,” the courts have ruled consistently that this due process requirement is applicable to all human beings. Basically, wherever the government goes, it is subject to constitutional restraints.

Traditionally, due process means a trial. In the case of a civilian, it means a jury trial, with the full panoply of attendant protections required by the Constitution. In the case of enemy combatants, it means a fair neutral tribunal.

The tribunal requirement came about in an odd and terrifying way. In 1942, four Nazi troops arrived via submarine at Amagansett Beach, New York, and exchanged their uniforms for civilian garb. At nearly the same time, four other Nazi troops arrived via submarine at Ponte Vedra Beach, Florida, and also donned civilian clothing. All eight set about their assigned task of destroying American munitions factories. After one of them went to the FBI, all eight were arrested.

President Franklin Roosevelt panicked and ordered all eight summarily executed. When two of the eight protested in perfect English that they were born in the US, and their protests proved accurate, FDR decided to appoint counsel for all of them and to hold a trial.

At trial, all eight were convicted of attempted sabotage behind enemy lines — a war crime. The Supreme Court quickly returned to Washington from its summer vacation and unanimously upheld the convictions. By the time the court issued its formal opinion, six of the eight had been executed. The two Americans were sentenced to life in prison. Their sentences were commuted five years later by President Harry Truman.

The linchpin to all this was FDR’s decision to appoint counsel and have a trial. The Supreme Court made it clear that even unlawful enemy combatants — those out of uniform and not on a recognized battlefield — are entitled to due process; and, but for the trial afforded to the Nazi saboteurs, it would not have permitted their executions.

This jurisprudence was essentially followed in three Supreme Court cases involving foreign persons whom the George W. Bush administration had arrested and characterized as enemy combatants detained at the US Naval Base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

In wartime, US troops can lawfully kill enemy troops that are engaged in violence against them. But, pursuant to these Supreme Court cases, the United Nations Charter — a treaty that the US wrote — as well the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights — another treaty that the US wrote — if combatants are not engaged in violence, they may not be harmed, but only arrested. All this presumes that Congress has in fact declared war on the country or group from which the combatants come. That hasn’t happened since Dec. 8, 1941.

Now, back to Trump ordering the military to kill foreigners in the Caribbean. International law provides for stopping ships engaged in violence in international waters. It also provides for stopping and searching ships — with probable cause for the search — in US territorial waters. But no law permits, and the prevailing judicial jurisprudence deriving from the Constitution and federal statutes absolutely prohibits, the summary murders of folks not engaged in violence — on the high seas or anywhere else.

The Attorney General has reluctantly revealed the existence of a legal memorandum purporting to justify Trump’s orders and the military’s killings — but she insisted the memorandum is classified. That is a non sequitur. A legal memorandum can only be based on public laws enacted by Congress and interpreted by the courts. There are no secret laws, and there can be no classified rationale for killing the legally innocent.

If the memorandum purports to permit the president to declare non-violent enemy combatants on a whim and kill them, it is in defiance of 80 years of consistent jurisprudence, and its drafters and executors have engaged in serious criminality. Where will these extrajudicial killings go next — to Chicago?

To learn more about Judge Andrew Napolitano, visit https://JudgeNap.com.
COPYRIGHT 2025 ANDREW P. NAPOLITANO
DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

October 10, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , | Leave a comment

Italian PM Meloni Embroiled in ICC Complaint Alleging Complicity in Gaza Genocide

21st Century Wire | October 9, 2025

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and a number of ministers are confronted with an ICC complaint that accuses them of complicity in genocide, as a group of jurists and attorneys point to ongoing arms collaboration with Israel and a lack of protection for the Global Sumud Flotilla. Jurists and Lawyers from Giuristi e Avvocati per la Palestina (GAP) have initiated two legal actions aimed at holding Italy accountable for its involvement in the Gaza conflict. The first initiative, submitted to the ICC, charges the Italian government with complicity in war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. The second initiative addresses the government’s purported negligence in safeguarding the Global Sumud Flotilla, a civilian fleet transporting humanitarian aid to Gaza, which was intercepted by Israeli forces in international waters.

According to a report from Lavialibera, the initiative has garnered backing from more than fifty notable figures in Italy, many of whom are active in politics and culture. The initiative has currently attracted the support of nearly 6,000 citizens. Gianluca Vitale, one of the GAP lawyers behind this action, explained to Lavialibera:

“We are calling for proceedings to be initiated against the Italian government, namely Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni , Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani , and Defense Minister Guido Crosetto , as well as Leonardo Spa CEO Roberto Cingolani” adding, “If there is substantial collaboration with Israeli authorities who are committing crimes, it means that the Italian authorities are complicit in the crime being committed.”

In a recent interview with Italian state broadcaster RAI 1, Meloni acknowledged that she and the aforementioned individuals faced a complaint at the International Criminal Court for their alleged involvement in the Gaza genocide.

Despite Meloni’s nervous reaction, the move is not unexpected, given that comparable actions have already been taken throughout Europe. In Germany, legal actions have been filed with the ICC and local courts targeting government officials and arms manufacturers for their alleged involvement in supporting Israel’s military actions in Gaza. Furthermore, more than 100 lawyers in France have officially requested the ICC to look into France’s potential complicity in genocide concerning Gaza.

In her July 2025 report, Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Palestinian Territories, indicates that eight states and at least 1,650 companies, including Italian manufacturer Leonardo S.p.A., contribute to the manufacturing and distribution of components and parts for the Israeli F-35 fleet, which Israel customizes and maintains in partnership with US defense contractor Lockheed Martin and local companies. INVESTIGATE, a project run by Action Center for Corporate Accountability of the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC), which exposes corporate complicity in state violence, issued a comprehensive report regarding Leonardo S.p.A., Italy’s largest weapons manufacturer and its dealings with Israel.

As per information from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), Italy was among just three nations that exported “major conventional arms” to Israel between 2020 and 2024. However, it is noteworthy that the United States and Germany accounted for a staggering 99 percent of the exports in the broader category of larger weaponry, which encompasses aircraft, missiles, tanks, and air defense systems.

Furthermore, the Jurists and lawyers for Palestine organization (GAP) formally cautioned the Italian government on September 24, urging it to “take all necessary measures to genuinely safeguard the Global Sumud Flotilla and its participants.” With civilian ships trying to breach the Israeli naval blockade and provide humanitarian assistance to Gaza being intercepted and their crew members detained, legal proceedings are being contemplated to assess the potential accountability of the Italian government regarding the actions of the Israeli Navy. It is generally recognized that the Israeli military’s recent actions against the Global Sumud Flotilla are deemed illegitimate, as they took place in international waters where Israel lacks the legal right to intervene, intercept and abduct its passengers against their will, making such actions a potential act of piracy.

In accordance with the recommendations issued by the UN International Court of Justice (ICJ), all state parties the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court—which Italy ratified on July 26, 1999—are required upon learning of, the existence of a serious risk that genocide will be committed, to implement reasonable measures within their power to prevent genocide. However, according to GAP, Meloni’s Government has not only refrained from doing so but, to the contrary, contributed to Israel wae crimes against the Palestinians.

According to GAP’s lawyer, the Italian government’s liability hinges on two key factors:

Firstly, demanding compliance to the Israeli blockade and thus deeming it legitimate amounts to complicity in the crime. The blockade is integral to Israel’s criminal actions, whether they be war crimes or genocide, as it plays a role in perpetuating the offensive within the Gaza Strip and employs starvation as a weapon.

The second factor pertains to the choice to withdraw the Navy vessel that was only briefly sent to escort the Global Sumud Flotilla. Withdrawing and consequently denying assistance signifies a failure to fulfill the duty of protection and, once again, inadvertently aids in the perpetration of a crime.

Full article

October 9, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment

White House Has Not Provided Proof That Boats Destroyed in Caribbean Were Carrying Drugs

By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | October 8, 2025

Two US officials said the White House has not provided proof to Capitol Hill that the four boats destroyed by the US military in the Caribbean were part of drug trafficking operations.

Starting in September, the US military began targeting vessels in the Caribbean Sea that were allegedly smuggling drugs for cartels designated as Foreign Terrorist Organizations. The US has destroyed at least four ships, killing 21 people.

Two sources speaking with the AP said the Trump administration has not provided evidence to Congress that the boats were in fact linked to narco-terrorist cartels. The officials explained the White House has only pointed to the videos published by President Donald Trump and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth showing the boats being destroyed by US strikes.

The Constitutionality and legality of the strikes are in question. Congress has not declared war on the cartels. President Donald Trump says the US is now engaged in an armed conflict with the narco-terrorist organizations.

The White House has been tight-lipped about its legal authority to use military force in law enforcement matters. Attorney General Pam Bondi refused to tell Congress how the White House believes it has the authority to conduct extrajudicial executions.

While the Trump administration says the goal of the attacks is to stop the flow of lethal drugs to the US, reports say the White House is moving towards attempting to remove Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro from power.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio claims that Maduro is the leader of a narco-terrorist cartel.

October 9, 2025 Posted by | War Crimes | , , | Leave a comment

UK universities spied on students for arms firms supplying Israel: Report

Press TV – October 8, 2025

Leaked emails have revealed that UK universities spied on students’ social media and chat groups at the request of arms companies supplying weapons to Israel.

According to internal correspondence obtained by The Guardian and Liberty Investigates, several universities assured these weapons manufacturers that they would keep watch over students’ online activity to detect and preempt potential protests.

Over the past two years, large-scale pro-Palestinian demonstrations have taken place across UK campuses, with students demanding an end to arms sales to the Israeli regime.

In one case, a university responding to a weapon manufacturer’s “security questionnaire” said it would conduct “active monitoring of social media” to detect any planned protests against Rolls-Royce during a careers fair.

Rolls-Royce, the UK’s second-largest arms manufacturer, directly supplies key components for Israeli military vehicles. Its German subsidiary, MTU, also produces engines used in Israel’s battle tanks, armored personnel carriers, and warships.

Loughborough University told a recruitment firm running a “Rolls-Royce roadshow” that its security team was conducting “active monitoring of social media … to provide early intelligence about protests.”

Emails from Heriot-Watt University suggest that Raytheon UK requested the university to “monitor university chat groups” on its behalf before a careers fair — and the university agreed to “implement the measures you have suggested.”

Similarly, Glasgow and Cardiff universities faced pressure from major UK aerospace firms — BAE Systems and Leonardo — to track online activity before career events. Some events were later moved online after potential protests were identified.

The UK also supplies BAE-made components to a global pool of F-35 fighter jets that Israel can access.

The surveillance of students’ social media has sparked outrage among advocacy groups, who argue that universities should support peaceful protest, not criminalize it.

Jo Grady, general secretary of the University and College Union, called the universities’ actions “utterly shameful,” adding that “so many universities have spent time and resources surveilling students who are engaged in peaceful protest against genocide.”

Data compiled by Liberty Investigates shows that one in four UK universities — 37 out of 154 — launched disciplinary investigations into pro-Gaza student and staff activists between October 2023 and March 2025, affecting up to 200 people.

The United Kingdom maintains close political and military ties with Israel, including arms sales, intelligence sharing, and military partnerships.

British arms companies continue to provide key components for Israeli military vehicles, fighter jets, and naval vessels — a relationship that human rights groups say makes the UK complicit in the regime’s war crimes in Gaza.

October 8, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Leave a comment

Are You On a Secret TSA Watchlist?

By Jim Bovard | The Libertarian Institute | October 7, 2025

In 1999, the Supreme Court recognized that the “‘constitutional right to travel from one State to another’ is firmly embedded in our jurisprudence.” Unless, of course, federal agents secretly disapprove of you, your beliefs, or your suspected connections.

The Transportation Security Administration has vexed Americans for more than twenty years. Last week, three separate idiotic TSA surveillance programs were exposed by Congress and the Trump administration.

In 2021, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) created a secret watchlist of individuals who publicly opposed President Joe Biden’s COVID mask mandate. Operation Freedom to Breathe resulted in dozens of individuals being either banned from flying or hit with additional groping or patdowns. As journalist Matt Taibbi reported, “12 were placed on a watch list for removing their masks in-flight,” which a TSA memo characterized as “an act of extreme recklessness in carrying out an act that represents a threat to the life of passengers and crew.” That covert crackdown only ended when a federal judge struck down Biden’s mask mandate in April 2022. Only in Washington would an edict to banish all dissidents be labeled Operation Freedom to Breathe.

The Biden’s TSA secretly condemned hundreds of people allegedly linked to the January 6, 2021 Capitol protests. TSA approved “enhanced screening” and watchlists for anyone “suspected of traveling to the National Capital Region” for that protest, Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) revealed. TSA bloated the list of January 6 suspects by tapping a George Washington University database of alleged extremists—which was as credible as randomly selecting names of Trump donors. A TSA privacy officer protested, “TSA is punishing people for the expression of their ideas when they haven’t been charged, let alone convicted of incitement or sedition.”

New dirt also came to the surface about the Quiet Skies program, which sent TSA air marshals to covertly surveil travelers on the flimsiest pretexts. If you fell asleep or used the bathroom or glared at noisy kids during a flight, those incriminating facts might have been added to your federal dossier. Air marshals noted whether suspects gained weight or were balding or were paranoid about the undercover federal agents who followed them into the parking lot to their cars. If you fidgeted, sweat, or had “strong body odor”—BOOM! the feds were onto you. Air marshals also zeroed in on “facial flushing,” “gripping/white knuckling bags,” “face touching,” or “wide open, staring eyes,” and “rapid eye blinking.”

Quiet Skies, which cost $200 million a year, was scandalized last year after it targeted former congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard (currently the Director of National Intelligence) after she criticized Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris. Turns out Quiet Skies was also tracking three Republican congressmen prior to the program being abolished in June. TSA has not yet revealed the names of those congressmen.

Legions of women bitterly complain on social media about TSA screeners molesting them. But if a woman pushes a TSA screeners hands away from her breasts, then she can placed on the TSA secret “95 list” of potentially troublesome travelers. TSA’s official watchlist defines troublemaker to include someone who merely “loiters” near a TSA checkpoint or demonstrates any “concerning behavior.” Any behavior which is “offensive [to the TSA] and without legal justification” can get a person secretly listed, according to a confidential TSA memo. TSA assistant administrator Darby LaJoye told Congress that any traveler who demonstrated “concerning” behavior can be secretly placed on the list. “Concerning behavior” is vague enough to add 10,000 chumps a day to the watchlist. The TSA would have been more honest if it announced that anyone who fails to instantly and unquestioningly submit to all TSA demands is guilty of insubordination.

TSA can also place someone on the watchlist simply because they are “publicly notorious.” Did getting denounced by TSA chief John Pistole in 2014 for “maligning” and “disparaging” TSA agents in an op-ed qualify me for the list and endless TSA supplemental patdowns when I travel? The Brennan Center for Justice warned that TSA could add “pretty much anyone with even a modest public profile, such as journalists or activists,” to the “95 list.” ACLU attorney Hugh Handeyside warns that the new watchlist “permits TSA officials to blacklist people for conduct that could be wholly innocuous. This is conduct that’s so completely subjective, and in many cases likely completely innocent, it just gives officers too much latitude to blacklist people arbitrarily and to essentially punish them for asserting their rights and in doing anything other than complying with officers’ demands.”

There are other TSA surveillance programs and watchlists that desperately need sunshine if not legal de-lousing. A 2023 report by the U.S. Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee noted that “U.S. travelers may be screened for at least 22 different reasons.” An Iron Curtain of secrecy covers the operation:

“The executive branch has revealed hardly any information about what watchlists it maintains, who is included, and why or how those lists are used.”

DHS receives requests from almost 20,000 people a year complaining about being banned from flying or subjected to enhanced screening, and 98% of those people are not on terrorist watchlists, according to TSA.

The Senate report revealed the existence of TSA’s Security Notification List which “includes individuals who may pose a threat to aviation security, but who do not warrant additional screening.” So if they pose a threat to airline safety, why are they permitted to fly? The report noted:

“These individuals may seek to intentionally evade or defeat security measures or may attempt to disrupt the safe and effective completion of screening…Individuals on this list may not be referred for additional screening solely by virtue of their placement on this list, but TSA personnel may be given forewarning of their travel.”

Is this simply the “Bad Attitude List”  or the “Give Hell to Anyone Who Complained Since 9/11 List”?

The Senate report warned, “A watchlist that is not properly maintained… breaks the trust with innocent Americans who get caught up in this net with no way out.” TSA watchlists are perilous to freedom because TSA proudly hires many employees who failed every intelligence test they ever took. “Senator Ted Kennedy and former U.S. Representative John Lewis, and even babies, have been stopped at airports because they shared biographical information with individuals on the [No Fly] terrorist  watchlist,” the Senate report noted.

How many other secret watchlists has TSA or DHS not yet revealed? We have no idea how many Americans’ rights and liberties continue to vanish into TSA black holes.

Endless false alarms at TSA checkpoints are a clue that the agency is still on par with a drunk blindfolded person swinging at a pinata. Airport security seems like a perpetual psycho-pathological experiment to determine how much degradation Americans will tolerate. Despite squeezing millions of butts and boobs, TSA has never caught a real terrorist. After pointlessly groping  millions of Americans, TSA has no excuse for groping millions more.

October 8, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Leave a comment

Spain to file ICC complaint over Israel’s mistreatment of Sumud flotilla activists

Press TV – October 7, 2025

Spanish Interior Minister Fernando Grande-Marlaska has suggested that legal measures might be pursued at the International Criminal Court (ICC) following reports from Spanish citizens on board the Global Sumud Flotilla regarding mistreatment by Israeli guards during their custody.

“I am concerned as a minister, and I am concerned as a Spanish citizen, and simply as a person, about any violation of a fundamental right, evidently. But for that, there are also legal channels: the International Criminal Court and also the Spanish courts when it concerns national citizens,” Marlaska said in an interview with public television broadcaster TVE on Monday.

He reiterated that criminal liabilities regarding individuals who might have been victims will be assessed and dealt with through the relevant national and international legal frameworks.

Marlaska also emphasized that boarding ships in international waters is subject to an international criminal law classification, as defined by clear conventions and also recognized within the national legal system, because “this would be a deprivation of liberty, absolutely illegal, for the people who were victims of these acts.”

Marlaska noted that the foremost priority is for the final 28 members of the flotilla to return to Spain “safe and sound.”

He underscored that the Spanish government “is absolutely proactive” in this case, “appearing before the International Criminal Court to defend the fundamental rights and public freedoms of Spanish citizens and other citizens.”

“There will be time to respond from a legal perspective. The Spanish government has already stated this from the very beginning, as I mentioned, appearing before the International Criminal Court,” the senior Spanish official said.

He also said that the attorney general’s office has initiated investigative proceedings as well.

“I believe that, in defending human rights and fundamental freedoms, no one can say that we have not been defending them from minute one,” he said.

The remarks come as the Gaza flotilla activists were deported from the Israeli-occupied territories amid numerous accounts of their mistreatment in Israeli detention centers.

According to the Spanish EFE news agency, they reported a lack of access to legal counsel and were also unable to contact their families.

The activists added that armed personnel entered the cells accompanied by dogs, directing them towards their heads.

They said they were deprived of sleep, moved between cells to prevent them from resting, and were treated “worse than animals.”

Approximately 450 individuals involved in the flotilla were detained from last Wednesday to Friday as Israeli forces intercepted the vessels, which aimed to breach a naval blockade of Gaza and provide aid to Palestinians in the besieged region.

Israel has maintained the blockade on Gaza, which is inhabited by nearly 2.4 million individuals, for nearly 18 years.

According to the health ministry of Gaza, Israeli attacks have claimed the lives of at least 67,160 Palestinians, predominantly women and children, in the besieged Gaza Strip since October 2023.

October 7, 2025 Posted by | Subjugation - Torture, War Crimes | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Gagauzia and the limits of nationalism in the post-Soviet space

Moldova’s pro-Western nationalism is eroding the country’s multiethnic coexistence

By Lucas Leiroz | Strategic Culture Foundation | October 7, 2025

The region of Gagauzia, a Turkic-speaking and Orthodox Christian enclave in southern Moldova, has become one of the most complex flashpoints in Eastern Europe today. The Moldovan government’s increasing push for accelerated Westernization and alignment with the European Union and NATO directly confronts the interests, identities, and aspirations of minority groups historically integrated into the post-Soviet space—such as the Gagauz.

Recognized as an autonomous republic within Moldova since 1995, Gagauzia is inhabited by a people of Oghuz Turkic origin, who converted to Orthodox Christianity through contact with Bulgarian missionaries during the Ottoman period and were heavily influenced by Russian culture throughout the 20th century. This fusion of influences shaped a unique identity: the Gagauz are simultaneously Turks, Orthodox Christians, Russophiles, and multilingual. They primarily speak Gagauz (a Turkic language), Russian, and, to a lesser extent, Moldovan (Romanian), maintaining strong cultural cohesion despite pressures from the Moldovan state to assimilate.

Gagauz autonomy emerged in the context of the Soviet collapse. In 1990, fearing that rising Moldovan-Romanian nationalism would lead to unification with Romania, the Gagauz declared independence—a move that did not lead to war but compelled the Moldovan state to grant the region special autonomy in 1995. For decades, this agreement formed the basis of internal stability in Moldova. However, under the administration of President Maia Sandu, this stability is rapidly deteriorating.

Since taking office, Sandu has pursued a strategic reorientation of Moldova toward the West, tightening ties with the European Union and adopting increasingly hostile rhetoric toward Russia. This Western shift, far from being solely geopolitical, has brought with it deep domestic transformations that directly impact minority groups like the Gagauz. The effort to consolidate a Westernized Moldovan national identity clashes directly with the Gagauz cultural ethos—traditionally conservative, Turanian, Slavophile, and opposed to the progressive social agenda promoted by Brussels.

In recent years, reports of political persecution in Gagauzia have multiplied. Regional authorities—including the head of the autonomous republic—have been arrested on charges of corruption and conspiracy, which many local observers view as politically motivated. Gagauz political parties have been banned or heavily restricted, and recent elections saw allegations of voter intimidation and restricted access to polling stations in the region.

This situation raises a difficult question: how far can a plurinational state like Moldova go in its Western integration project without undermining internal cohesion? History shows that the exclusion of ethnic minorities—especially in post-imperial contexts—tends to trigger separatist movements, and Gagauzia is beginning to follow this path.

Growing disillusionment with the Moldovan state is fueling separatist and Russian-reintegrationist sentiments. The idea of eventual unification with Moscow (in a post-SVO scenario), possibly aligning Gagauzia’s destiny with that of Transnistria, is regaining adhesion among the Gagauz as their autonomy is gradually dismantled. This scenario undermines not only Moldova’s territorial integrity but also the very viability of the Western project in the region, which is built on the rhetoric of human rights and diversity but fails to uphold these principles for minorities such as the Gagauz.

If Moldova continues on its current trajectory—disregarding the cultural and political specificities of its minority populations—it risks replicating a pattern seen elsewhere in the post-Soviet world: the collapse of interethnic pacts and the outbreak of separatist conflicts. A potential Gagauz secession, coupled with broader territorial reconfiguration involving Transnistria, could lead to a redrawing of Moldova’s borders and the practical end of its existence as a multiethnic state.

Paradoxically, only with the separation of these regions—deeply incompatible with the current Moldovan-Romanian national project—might Moldova fully and stably integrate into Romania, without harmfully affecting minority groups that do not fit into the Romanian-Moldovan identity. For the West, this would mean the loss of two Russophile spheres of influence, but the consolidation of a new, more cohesive and aligned EU member state.

Meanwhile, in Gagauzia, the sense that resisting forced Westernization is a way of preserving not only political autonomy but cultural identity continues to grow. And it is this tension—between integration and cultural survival—that will define the region’s future.

October 7, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , | Leave a comment

Why did over 2,000 Yemenite babies disappear in 1950s Israel?

Al Jazeera | October 22, 2024

The disappearance of more than 2,000 babies – suspected victims of irregular adoption – who arrived in Israel in 1949.

How can more than 2,000 babies simply disappear? It’s a question being asked in Israel, as the mystery of the Yemenite Children Affair nudges ever closer to the truth.

This film tells the remarkable story of the aftermath of “Operation Magic Carpet” – the 1949 relocation of almost 50,000 Jews from Yemen to the newly created state of Israel. Most settled in Israel but it is alleged several thousand babies were separated from their parents while staying in transit camps. Did these infants succumb to deadly childhood illnesses or is there a darker truth?

Evidence now suggests that many were given up for adoption without their parents’ knowledge and were raised by wealthy childless Israeli and American couples. Israel has finally acknowledged the state’s role in the Yemenite Children Affair and launched a redress scheme, but many questions remain unanswered.

October 6, 2025 Posted by | Corruption, Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Timeless or most popular, Video | , , | Leave a comment

Free Speech After Charlie Kirk: an American Lesson for Pam Bondi, Donald Trump & Netanyahu

By Ilana Mercer | LewRockwell.com | October 4, 2025

Let us be clear about what freedom of speech à la America truly means:

The words people speak, chant, write and tweet; the beliefs they are known to hold, the flags they fly or burn, the symbolic, non-violent ceremonies and rituals they enact, the insignia, paraphernalia; the goose-stepping, Hitler salutes they muck around with—provided no physical aggression is involved (violence against animals included), all this counts as protected speech, licit in natural law.

So long as oddities and idiosyncrasies, whether performed alone or in groups, thoughts harbored privately or shared in public—so long as no violence accompanies such speech or behavior; so long as your mitts stop at the next man’s face (or at the next mutt’s fury face, Kristi Noem): SPEECH. It’s all speech. It should be free, unfettered and as wild and as wanton as can be.

At their worst, expressions of ostensible antisemitism, Naziism, racisms or other antipathies amount to thought crimes, nothing more, if expressed as a belief system severally or collectively, rather than in palpably violent actions.  Whether your thoughts are spoken, chanted, written or preached; be they impolite or impolitic: they are, at worst, no more than thought crimes.

Thought crimes are nobody’s business in a free society. Thought crimes ought to be ferociously protected by a free people. By logical extension, any accusations of antisemitism, Naziism or other antipathies and racisms, are especially suspect when emitted as a meme from American institutionalized power structures.

One such obscenely wealthy and worthless power structure is the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), or Defamation League—a more apt moniker once suggested by Elon Musk, before he joined the ADL in severely censoring some speech on the X platform. The ADL is a meddlesome shakedown operation, in the mold of the Southern Poverty Law Center (“Smear Artists for the Total State,” wrote Tom DiLorenzo). It has taken it upon itself to decide who lives and who dies socially and financially on the basis of the unfortunate individual’s ideas, spoken and written.

In the American tradition, thoughts and words spoken or written that are politically impolite—again, racism; Naziism, antisemitism—retain protected status as speech beyond the adjudication of law-makers, bureaucrats, mediacrats, educrats and technocrats.

Sniffing out racists or anti-Semites is an absolute no-no for any and all self-respecting, libertarian-minded Americans, or any American, for that matter. Like creedal libertarians, Americans don’t, or should not, prosecute thought crimes or persecute thought “criminals.”

Ours should be The Skokie Standard of free speech and thinking (which I articulated in August 2022). What is The Skokie Standard of free speech? In 1978, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) took a stand for free speech by defending a neo-Nazi group that wanted to march through the Chicago suburb of Skokie, where many Holocaust survivors lived. The Skokie Standard of free speech is one that champions unpopular expression, and vigorously defends all marginalized speakers and thinkers, rather than purveying and protecting state and corporate ideology du jour.

Let me repeat what the Skokie Standard of free speech stands for here: However which way they are grouped, the words people individually or collectively speak, chant, write and tweet; the beliefs they are known to hold, the flags they fly or stomp, the symbolic, non-violent ceremonies, rituals and protests they perform; the insignia, paraphernalia, the goose-stepping, Hitler salutes they dick around with—provided no physical aggression is involved, all that counts as protected speech.

Turning Point USA’s Charlie Kirk, RIP, got it. On May 2, 2024, Kirk wrote the following: “Hate speech does not exist legally in America. There’s ugly speech. There’s gross speech. There’s evil speech. And ALL of it is protected by the First Amendment. Keep America free.”

Trump’s Attorney General Pam Bondi doesn’t get it. No wonder even Glenn Greenwald, once a practicing constitutional attorney—and a man of manners and decorum—regularly appends “dumb” and “lacking any grasp of constitutional law” to any mention of Bondi, who said this after Kirk’s murder:

The Justice Department would “absolutely target you, go after you, if you are targeting anyone with hate speech… There’s free speech, and then there’s hate speech. And there is no place—especially now, especially after what happened to Charlie — [for that] in our society,” Bondi told a podcaster likewise cerebrally compromised.

If you thought the nation’s chief law enforcement officer had blurted out on an impulse such promises of unconstitutional hate-speech prosecutions; I’m sorry to say that Bondi only doubled down. In scant regard for the letter and spirit of American constitutional law, she advised employers, on September 15, of their “obligation to get rid of people who are saying horrible things.”

While “The First Amendment doesn’t stop private employers from choosing to fire people for speech; it can be illegal for the government to use its power to pressure a private company into firing a staff member.” In America, not even do celebrations of Kirk’s assassination count as threats of violence or incitement to violence. In fact, “government retribution for speech,” lambasted U.S. District Judge William Young, a Reagan appointee, “is directly forbidden by the First Amendment.”

For our libertarian purposes, moreover, speech should never be defended by deploying a contents-driven defense, such as that a book, an utterance or their author must be spared on account that the person is good and his words are not racist and are against bigotry.

The Argument from Freedom means arguing process, not content. Racism, (alleged) antisemitism or Naziism in targeted literature or in protests should always and everywhere be a peripheral issue. Or, preferably, no issue at all.

The Argument from Freedom means arguing not over the contents of publications like Mein Kampf or the merit of protests for Palestine, but for their publication and practice irrespective of their contents. Which is why I say freedom’s argument is an argument from process, not content.

Freedom makes the case for an unfettered free market in ideas, good and bad. Freedom argues for politically impolite books to be published and read freely. It demands that all offensive literature be available to the free men and women who inhabit the free society. And not because of history; so that we don’t forget it or repeat it. Rather, freedom needs no justification. It is an end unto itself. You are deficient in American solidarity if you don’t stand up for non-violent protest and all speech.

Liberty is a simple thing. It’s the unassailable right to shout, flail your arms, and verbally provoke people in power, unmolested. Tyranny is when those small things can get you assaulted, incarcerated, injured, deported, even killed.

Ultimately banning books or proscribing speech and speakers as the kangaroo courts of Britain, Europe and Canada do legally, assumes a lack of choice and agency among ostensibly “free” human beings. It’s also predicated on the acceptance of a higher authority which decides for the rest of us which cultural products are fit for our consumption.

I thus put it to you, dear reader, left and right, that speech restrictions stateside in the form of the Antisemitism Awareness Act mirror the worst of British and western Europe’s anti-speech tribunals. Tabled by a Republican and a Democrat, S. 4127, which mercifully is still in committee, would embed state agitprop throughout American education. For posterity. Aside being in violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, the Antisemitism Awareness Act would utterly enervate discourse in our country and criminalize vast tracts of speech as well as proscribe actions that are licit in constitutional and natural law.

Left, Right and libertarian; we can and must, then, join in unapologetically rejecting the very idea of policing, purging, persecuting or prosecuting people for holding and expressing politically unpopular ideas in action or in speech.

October 6, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Leave a comment

Mexico Bill Proposes Prison for AI Memes Mocking Public Figures

By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | October 6, 2025

Mexico’s Congress is once again at the center of a free speech storm.

This time, Deputy Armando Corona Arvizu from the ruling Morena party is proposing to make it a crime to create or share AI-generated memes or digital images that make fun of someone without their consent.

His initiative, filed in the Chamber of Deputies, sets out prison terms of three to six years and fines for anyone who “create, manipulate, transform, reproduce or disseminate images, videos, audios or digital representations” made with artificial intelligence for the purpose of “ridiculing, harassing, impersonating or damaging” a person’s “reputation or dignity.”

Read the bill here.

The punishment would increase by half if the person targeted is a public official, minor, or person with a disability, or if the content spreads widely online or causes personal, psychological, or professional harm.

The bill presents itself as protection against digital abuse but is, as always, a new attempt at censorship.

The initiative would insert Articles 211 Bis 8 and 211 Bis 9 into the Federal Penal Code, written in vague and sweeping terms that could cover almost any form of online expression.

It makes no distinction between a malicious deepfake and a harmless meme.

By criminalizing content intended to “ridicule,” the bill allows courts or public figures to decide what counts as ridicule. That opens the door to arbitrary enforcement.

There are no explicit protections for parody, satire, or public-interest criticism, all of which are essential to a free society.

Even more troubling, the law increases penalties when the alleged victim is a public servant.

That provision could turn the law into a tool for politicians to insulate themselves from criticism, since any joke, meme, or cartoon could be claimed to harm their “dignity.”

Mexico has long relied on humor as a form of political expression.

Memes, cartoons, and viral jokes often serve as the public’s way of questioning authority. Turning that humor into a potential crime would be a serious step backward.

Instead of making the internet safer, this measure could create a chilling effect that discourages users from speaking or joking freely for fear of prison time.

This is not the first time Morena has tried to police online humor. Former Puebla governor Alejandro Armenta introduced what became known as the Censorship Law, which sought to punish people for “insulting or offending” others online.

The watchdog group Article 19 warned that its broad language could easily be used against journalists or ordinary citizens.

Earlier this year, Ricardo Monreal suggested an Anti-Memes Law that would have required humorous posts to be labeled as “memes” to avoid penalties. Public outrage forced him to abandon the idea.

Corona’s proposal follows the same path under a new label. While it claims to address the dangers of AI manipulation, its vague wording threatens free expression instead of safeguarding it.

October 6, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »