NYU withholds diploma of student who condemned Israel’s Gaza genocide
MEMO | May 16, 2025
In the latest example of escalating repression against Palestine solidarity activism on US campuses, New York University (NYU) has withheld the diploma of student speaker Logan Rozos after he used his commencement address to denounce Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza and the US’s complicity.
Rozos, graduating from NYU’s Gallatin School of Individualised Study, told his fellow students on Wednesday: “The only thing that is appropriate to say in this time and to a group this large is a recognition of the atrocities currently happening in Palestine.”
In his speech, Rozos condemned the genocide “supported politically and militarily by the United States, paid for by our tax dollars and livestreamed to our phones for the past 18 months.” He further stated: “I do not wish to speak only to my own politics today, but to speak for all people of conscience, and all people who feel the moral injury of this atrocity.”
Razos’s remarks were met with widespread applause from students. NYU swiftly responded by issuing a statement denouncing Rozos, accusing him of violating university rules and announcing it would withhold his diploma pending disciplinary action.
The university also removed Rozos’s student profile from its website, adding to concerns about institutional retaliation.
This incident comes amid a wider crackdown on free speech and pro-Palestinian activism at US universities. NYU, like many elite institutions, has adopted the highly controversial International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of anti-Semitism, which conflates political opposition to Zionism and Israel’s colonial violence with anti-Jewish hatred. Critics, including human rights scholars and Jewish groups, warn that such measures are being weaponised to suppress Palestinian advocacy and silence dissenting voices.
Rozos’s speech, and NYU’s reaction, follows a pattern of repression at the university. Over the past year, NYU administrators have called police to disperse peaceful encampments and arrested dozens of students and faculty protesting Israel’s war on Gaza. The university has also updated its conduct guidelines to classify phrases such as “Zionist” as discriminatory, explicitly erasing the distinction between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism.
In December 2024, NYU declared two tenured professors, Andrew Ross and Sonya Posmentier, “persona non grata” after they joined a sit-in demanding the university divest from companies profiting from Israel’s war crimes in Gaza. Months later, NYU cancelled a talk by Doctors Without Borders’ former president Dr Joanne Liu, deeming her slides on Gaza civilian casualties potentially “anti-Semitic.”
Human rights advocates and academic freedom organisations have condemned these actions, warning that universities like NYU are sacrificing core principles of free speech and academic independence under pressure from pro-Israel donors, political figures, and lobby groups.
Rozos’s speech, which framed Israel’s war on Gaza as a genocide livestreamed in real time, resonates with warnings from genocide scholars, legal experts and international bodies that Israel’s actions meet the legal definition of genocide. Despite this, Rozos now faces institutional reprisals for expressing what many human rights defenders see as an urgent moral truth.
Israel kills over 100 Palestinians in northern Gaza attacks
Bodies of Palestinians, who lost their lives after Israeli attacks, are brought to Indonesia Hospital in Gaza City, Gaza on May 16, 2025. [Abdalhkem Abu Riash – Anadolu Agency]
MEMO | May 16, 2025
More than 100 Palestinians were killed in several attacks carried out by the Israeli occupation army in northern Gaza at daybreak today.
Medical sources told Anadolu that the Israeli occupation army carried out “horrific massacres” targeting civilians.
They reported several casualties when the Israeli army targeted an ambulance in the town of Jabalia in northern Gaza, the latest in a series of attacks on medics and healthcare facilities.
“Since early Friday, rescue teams have recovered 50 bodies from under the rubble following Israeli air strikes on 11 residential homes in northern Gaza,” Gaza Civil Defence spokesman Mahmoud Basal said.
He added that “over 50 others are still trapped beneath the debris.”
He warned that the actual death toll is likely much higher, as emergency crews have been unable to reach several areas due to the ongoing bombardment across the enclave.
Basal added that Israeli occupation forces not only struck densely populated homes but also targeted paramedics attempting to rescue victims and retrieve bodies in the aftermath of the attacks.
“There are bodies still lying in the streets of Beit Lahia, Jabalia, Jabalia refugee camp, and Beit Hanoun,” he said. “Rescue teams cannot access them because of the intensity of the strikes.”
The Israeli army has pursued a brutal offensive on the Gaza Strip since October 2023, killing more than 53,000 Palestinians, most of them women and children.
Declassified files expose secret Western support for Israeli assassinations
MEMO | May 16, 2025
Newly declassified documents have revealed that Western intelligence services secretly collaborated with Israel’s Mossad in the 1970s, providing critical intelligence that enabled the assassination of Palestinian activists across Europe, without any parliamentary oversight or democratic scrutiny. The revelation has fuelled concerns that similar clandestine intelligence-sharing arrangements are likely facilitating Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza today.
According to a detailed exposé by the Guardian, a covert network known as “Kilowatt”—comprising at least 18 Western intelligence agencies including those of the UK, US, France, and West Germany, was established in 1971 to share sensitive intelligence on Palestinian groups. The information shared included personal details, safe house locations, and vehicle registrations of Palestinian individuals who were subsequently targeted by Mossad hit squads.
Dr Aviva Guttmann, the historian who uncovered the encrypted cables in Swiss archives, confirmed that the intelligence shared was granular and critical to Israel’s covert killings, many of which took place in Paris, Rome, Athens, and Nicosia. “At the very beginning, perhaps officials were unaware of the extrajudicial assassinations, but later, they certainly knew and continued sharing intelligence,” Guttmann told the Guardian.
This covert support, the paper reported, operated entirely beyond the purview of elected officials, and would likely have triggered public outrage had it been exposed at the time. Indeed, some of those assassinated were publicly disputed as innocent, such as Wael Zwaiter, a Palestinian intellectual gunned down in Rome in 1972, whom Israel accused of being linked to the Black September Organisation. Evidence supporting such claims was largely based on intelligence fed through the Kilowatt system.
The revelations, while historical, have sparked urgent comparisons to the present day, where Israel is prosecuting what rights experts and genocide scholars widely describe as an ongoing genocide in Gaza, once again behind a wall of secrecy and political impunity.
Dr Guttmann herself underlined the relevance of these disclosures, warning that the shadowy practices of intelligence-sharing without political oversight remain largely unchanged: “International relations of the secret state are completely off the radar of politicians, parliaments, or the public. Even today, there will be a lot of information being shared about which we know absolutely nothing,” she stressed to the Guardian.
Critics argue that such secrecy underpins the UK’s and other Western states’ complicity in Israel’s Gaza genocide, which since October 2023 has killed over 53,000 Palestinians, mostly women and children. Despite the International Court of Justice opening a genocide case against Israel, British intelligence cooperation with Israeli agencies continues in the dark, with no democratic accountability or transparency. The UK government has also refused to clarify the purpose of more than 500 Royal Air Force surveillance flights over Gaza, raising fears these may be contributing to targeted killing.
Another Report on Israel’s Genocide. More Silence & Complicity From The Liberal West
By John J. Mearsheimer | May 11, 2025
The UN Human Rights Council has issued a lengthy report titled “Anatomy of a Genocide.” As the title indicates, it describes in detail the ongoing Israeli Genocide in Gaza.
Despite the abundance of evidence regarding Israel’s savagery, the liberal West not only does virtually nothing to stop it, but is actually complicit in the genocide.
Where are all those liberal academics, activists, journalists, and policymakers who have spent much of their adult life preaching about human rights and the virtues of the liberal international order? They are AWOL in the face of one of the great crimes of modern times.
Alex Lo, the distinguished columnist for The South China Morning Post, hits the nail on the head in his recent column, which is titled: “The Western World Has Already Dug Its Own Grave in Gaza War.”
He goes on to say: “By enabling Israel to unleash its genocidal impulse, most leaders of developed nations have crossed a moral red line that cannot be undone.”
The following three paragraphs from Lo are especially worth considering:
The most extraordinary censorship is being exercised across many Western countries, but especially in the United States and Germany, to silence anyone who tries to speak out what everyone already knows is going on in Palestine. It is no accident that the two countries that make the most of the Holocaust as universal civic education are the two countries that most actively enable a real-time genocide being committed and shown live on our computer screens and social media pages.
Silencing the victims’ cries so the killers can continue with the butchery, and criticism is considered racial hate speech against the killers and their apologists. Who does that?
The West cares more about the feelings of the butchers than the lives and limbs of victims. Western ‘civilisation’ now sounds like a contradiction in terms.
Why is the secret German spy report on the AfD party only filled with public statements?
Remix News | May 15, 2025
The German domestic spy service, the Office of the Protection of the Constitution (BfV), has released a 1,100-page report on the Alternative for Germany (AfD), which it used to label the party a “confirmed” right-wing extremist party. The report is huge and reads like it was written by Antifa, but that was to be expected. However, one interesting point is that it contains only public statements, including quotes made by AfD politicians and a lot of memes.
Why is that?
We already know that the BfV is secretly surveilling AfD members in certain German states, mostly in the east, where the party is “confirmed right-wing extremist” already. This designation allows for the BfV in those states to partake in extraordinary surveillance powers over AfD members, including reading their chats and emails. Presumably, they can also track their browsing history, and perhaps they are even listening in on their conversations at home.
What this means is that the BfV has plenty of statements, memes and content to use based on private statements, but it is purposefully choosing not to use them. After all, a certain number of those AfD members, in private moments, probably also express opinions, post memes, or share thoughts that the BfV would love to include in a secret report on the party, which many hope will eventually justify an outright ban.
Again, why is the BfV not using these private statements?
There are multiple reasons. For one, a big part of the apparatus of spy agencies is to obtain information, but not release it to the public. The public may not be able to stomach such personal and private information and the means that were used to obtain it. Since the Edward Snowden revelations, and even before then, we have become acutely aware that we have accepted devices into our lives and homes that can be used to spy on us on a scale never seen before in history. However, even now — even after all this information has been revealed — I believe nearly all of us still cannot quite grasp what this means — nor do we want to.
Yes, we know that AfD members are being spied on across Germany. Their emails are read, their phone calls are recorded. AI is being used to sort out keywords of interest to the security services. However, nobody really knows how this information is being processed and what it is being used for, or even who is reading it. The spies who control this information have extraordinary power. As a significant portion of them are now far left, at least in Germany, they believe they are acting as a bulwark against the rise of Nazism, and the ends justify the means when it comes to the AfD. There are other psychological motives at work, of course, as spy agencies are on the whole very good at keeping their secrets, not even necessarily because of internal controls, but because the spies are dedicated to their mission. There is, also, the sense of power that comes with being the watcher, and for many spies, this is a powerful intoxicant. They know, while you are in the dark.
In practice, these spies know which AfD members are having affairs, their personal struggles, their health issues, their financial situation, and even their personal browsing history. In other words, they know their targets better in many cases than even their close friends and family. The spies of the world, not just in Germany, are now in many ways gods and mind readers, seeing through the walls people build up around themselves and accessing their darkest fears and secrets — all due to rapid advances in technology and the rise of smartphones.
Earlier this month, commentator Eva Vlaardingerbroek, the famed Dutch activist reported that she was alerted that her phone was being breached with Pegasus-like spyware, mainly produced in Israel, which can unlock essentially every aspect of her personal life, including chats, location data, photos, contacts, and so on. With this software, they can even record her in real time, including personal conversations in her home, as well as turn on her camera to record her in her most personal moments.
This software, and software like it, has been used on thousands of people, including journalists, politicians, and activists, sometimes with deadly results. It is not just the right, but far-left activists have also been targeted, including human rights activists. It is also unclear how long Vlaardingerbroek may have been targeted in such a manner. Previous versions of Apple iOS may have not been able to detect this software on her phone. In short, much of her personal life may already be in a database somewhere waiting to be used by intelligence.
Vlaardingerbroek is not in the AfD or even German, but she has backed the party, and she and people like her are most certainly the target of intelligence operatives in countries across Europe.
The point is that this software and the means for surveilling people are very unsettling. In a privacy-minded country like Germany, revealing the scale of surveillance being used against the AfD may be a scandal within itself, and could taint the entire report, which at the end of the day, should be used to justify a ban of the AfD.
There may have been voices in the BfV who were calling to use secretly recorded data in the report as well, but the agency also knew this report would eventually be leaked and made public. The agency does not appear to want to divulge who they are surveilling, what information they have about them, and how they obtained this information.
Another important consideration is also to be taken into account. The BfV decided it did not need to include this secret information in the report because it is likely confident that it can get what it wants using public statements alone. It can still keep the scale of its surveillance secret and get the ban it desires — at least that is the gamble the agency is making.
Surveillance is everywhere, it is being practiced by the left, the right, and many foreign governments are also active in the West, collecting data on targets. So, this is not a uniquely German issue by any means. However, if the establishment in Germany becomes truly desperate, there is probably a secret report waiting that includes far more information and personal details than many Germans want to believe is possible.
BBC’s May 14 interview with Gaza aid chief was shameful
By Jonathan Cook | May 14, 2025
There was yet more shameful reporting by BBC News at Ten last night, with international editor Jeremy Bowen the chief culprit this time.
He prefaced an interview with Philippe Lazzarini, head of United Nations refugee agency UNRWA, with an utterly unwarranted disclaimer – as though he was talking to a terrorist, not a leading human rights advocate who has been desperately trying to keep the last aid life-lines open to the people of Gaza as they are being actively starved to death by Israel.
The only time I can remember Bowen prefacing an interview in such apologetic terms was when he interviewed Hamas’ deputy political chief, Khalil al-Hayya, last October.
That was shameful too. But at least on that occasion, Bowen had an excuse: under Britain’s draconian Terrorism Act, saying or doing anything that might be viewed as favouring Hamas can land you with a 14-year prison sentence for supporting terrorism.
But why on earth would Bowen imply that Lazzarini’s remarks – on the intense suffering of Gaza’s population in the third month of a complete Israeli aid blockade – need to be treated with caution, in the same manner as those of a Hamas leader?
For one reason only. Because Israel, quite preposterously and for completely self-serving reasons, claims UNRWA is a front for Hamas. Since January, Israel has outlawed the organisation from operating in the Palestinian territories it continues to illegally occupy. As ever, the BBC is terrified of upsetting the Israelis.
Israel has long wanted UNRWA out of the picture because it is the last significant organisation to uphold the rights of Palestinian refugees enshrined in international law. It is, therefore, a major obstacle to Israel ethnically cleansing Palestinians from what is left of their homeland.
Before airing the interview with Lazzarini, Bowen cautioned: “Israel says he is a liar, and that his organisation has been infiltrated by Hamas. But I felt it was important to talk to him for a number of reasons.
“First off, the British government deals with him, and funds his organisation. Which is the largest dealing with Palestinian refugees. They know a lot of what is going on, so therefore I think it is important to speak to people like him.”
Bowen would never consider prefacing an interview with Benjamin Netanyahu in a similar manner, even though the following would actually be truthful and far more deserved:
“The International Criminal Court has issued an arrest warrant for the Israeli prime minister, accusing him of crimes against humanity. But I felt it was important to talk to him for a number of reasons.
“First off, the British government deals with him, and sends weapons to his military to carry out the crimes he is accused of. As its leader, he obviously knows a lot about what Israel is up to, so therefore I think it is important to speak to someone like him.”
Can you imagine the BBC ever introducing Netanyahu in that way? Of course, you can’t – even though, in journalistic, ethical and legal terms, it would be fully warranted.
But in the case the Lazzarini, there are absolutely no grounds for such a prologue – except to promote an Israeli pro-genocide agenda. Bowen’s remarks suggest he needs to explain why, in the midst of an Israeli-engineered famine in Gaza, the BBC would choose to speak to one of the most knowledgeable public figures about that starvation.
Bowen’s resort to an explanation instantly paints Lazzarini as problematic and controversial. It aligns with, and reinforces, Israel’s entirely bogus conflation of UNRWA and Hamas.
Even were Israel’s claims about UNRWA true of local staff in Gaza – and Israel has supplied precisely no evidence they are, as Lazzarini makes clear in a longer edit of the interview that aired on the BBC’s Six O’Clock News – that would in no way implicate Lazzarini. His remarks in the interview, on the catastrophic suffering of Gaza, are echoed by all aid agencies.
Bowen’s apologetic tone not only served to undercut the power of what Lazzarini was saying, but bolstered Israel’s ridiculous smears of UNRWA. That will have delighted Israel, and given it a little bit more leeway to carry on the starvation of Gaza, even as the first establishment voices tentatively start calling time on the genocide – 19 months too late.
Notice this from Bowen too. He asks Lazzarini: ‘When people look back on what’s been happening in the future, will they see, actually, a big international failure?”
Lazzarini responds: “I think in the coming years we will realise how wrong we have been, how on the wrong side of history we have been. We have, under our watch, let a massive atrocity unfold.”
Bowen jumps in: “Would you include the 7th of October in that?”
Lazzarini answers: “I would definitely include the 7th of October.”
But the set-up from Bowen is entirely unfair. He asks Lazzarini a question about “international failure” in relation to Gaza, and Lazzarini responds about the failure by the West to do anything to stop an atrocity – more properly a genocide – unfold over the past 19 months.
The events of 7 October 2023 are irrelevant to that discussion. There has been no “international failure” to support Israel. The West has armed it to the hilt and prioritised the suffering caused to Israelis by Hamas’ one-day attack over the incomparably greater suffering caused to Palestinians by 19 months of Israel’s slaughter and starvation.
Bowen’s interjected question about 7 October is a nonsense. It is levered in simply to cast further doubt on Lazzarini’s good faith in the hope of placating Israel, or at least providing the BBC with a defence when Israel goes on the offensive against Bowen for speaking to UNRWA.
The atrocities carried out on October 7 occurred in the context of decades of brutal and illegal Israeli military occupation of the Palestinian territories, of settlement expansion and apartheid rule, and of a 16-year siege of Gaza.
The international community was certainly on the “wrong side of history”, but not in the sense Bowen intends or Lazzarini infers from Bowen’s question. The West failed because it did precisely nothing to stop Israel’s brutalisation of the Palestinian people over those many decades – in fact, the West assisted Israel – and thereby guaranteed that Palestinians in Gaza would seek to break out of their concentration camp sooner or later.
Lazzarini’s remarks on the catastrophe in Gaza should be seen as self-evident. But Bowen and the BBC undermined his message by framing him and his organisation as suspect – and all because Israel, a criminal state starving the people of Gaza, has made an entirely unfounded allegation against the organisation trying to stop its crimes against humanity.
This is the same pattern of smears from Israel that has claimed all 36 hospitals in Gaza are Hamas “command and control centres” – again without a shred of evidence – to justify it bombing them all, leaving Gaza’s population without any meaningful health care system as malnutrition and starvation take hold.
Israel struck another hospital yesterday, the European Hospital in Khan Younis, as medics there were waiting to evacuate sick and injured children. The attack killed at least 28 people and injured many more, including a BBC freelance journalist who was conducting an interview there as the missiles hit.
Notably, BBC News at Ten blanked out its journalist’s face, adding: “For his safety, we are not revealing his name.” The BBC did not explain who the journalist needed protecting from, or why.
That is because the BBC rarely mentions that Israel has assassinated more than 200 Palestinian journalists in Gaza, as well as banning all foreign correspondents from entering the enclave, in its attempts to limit news coverage and smear what does come out as Hamas propaganda. Israel understands it is easier to commit genocide in the dark.
You might assume a major news organisation like the BBC would wish to be seen showing at least some solidarity with those being murdered for doing journalism – some of them while working to provide the BBC with news. You would be wrong.
We shouldn’t pretend that it was Bowen’s choice to attach such a disgraceful disclaimer to his interview. We all understand that he is under enormous pressure, both from within the BBC and outside.
BBC executives have appointed and protected Raffi Berg, a man who publicly counts a former senior figure in Israel’s spy agency Mossad as a friend, to oversee the corporation’s Middle East coverage.
And as the late Greg Philo reported in his 2011 book More Bad News from Israel, a BBC News editor told him at that time: “We wait in fear for the telephone call from the Israelis”. Things are far, far worse 14 years on.
Excuses won’t wash any longer. We are 19 months into a genocide. Helping Israel to launder its crimes is to become complicit in them. No journalist should be allowing themselves to be pressured into this kind of moral and professional failure.
Netanyahu: Israel is destroying Gaza so Palestinians are forced to leave
MEMO | May 14, 2025
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told members of the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee on Sunday that Tel Aviv is “destroying more and more houses [in Gaza] so the Palestinians will have nowhere to return,” according to quotes from the session leaked to the media.
“The only obvious result will be Gazans choosing to emigrate outside of the Strip,” Netanyahu continued, adding that Israel’s “main problem is finding countries to take them in.”
“I know I will disappoint some people here, but we are not talking about Israeli settlements in the Gaza Strip right now,” Netanyahu told lawmakers.
According to partial transcripts from the meeting leaked to the Israeli Maariv newspaper, Member of the Knesset Limor Son Har-Melech replied: “Bring the Jews of the United States [to settle Gaza]. That way, we can kill two birds with one stone.”
Netanyahu also claimed that the US “remains interested in the plan to take over the Strip’s administration” but the Times of Israel quoted sources familiar with the matter as saying that the Trump administration has put minimal effort into actually advancing Trump’s Gaza takeover plan since it was announced in early February following the massive pushback it received from Arab allies.
The Israeli military has destroyed most of the Gaza Strip during the ongoing military operations, displacing 1.9 million Palestinians multiple times within the Strip, amid deteriorating humanitarian conditions.
Israel has also imposed a complete blockade on the Strip, preventing the entry of food, water, fuel, medicines and all humanitarian aid since early March, exacerbating the suffering of the besieged population.
US court hits Israeli spyware firm NSO with $167m fine over Pegasus abuses
MEMO | May 14, 2025
A federal jury in California has ordered Israeli surveillance firm NSO Group to pay Meta $167 million in punitive damages, marking the first time a court has imposed financial liability on a spyware vendor for abuses linked to its software.
The ruling sends a strong signal that private firms profiting from invasive surveillance technology will not be shielded by their association with government clients. After a single day of deliberation, jurors found that NSO had acted with “malice, oppression or fraud” in deploying its Pegasus spyware against 1,400 WhatsApp users.
Pegasus, which grants near-total access to a target’s device, including microphones, cameras and encrypted messages, was used not against criminals, but journalists, human rights defenders and political dissidents. Meta, which owns WhatsApp, described the hacking as “despicable” and a clear violation of privacy rights.
NSO has long claimed that its spyware is sold only to vetted state clients for national security purposes. However, investigations have shown Pegasus being deployed to facilitate transnational repression by authoritarian regimes.
The previous US administration blacklisted NSO over its role in such abuses, making it the first company added to the US entity list for enabling state surveillance. The jury’s decision is expected to add pressure on Washington to further regulate the commercial spyware sector.
While the financial penalty may prove difficult to collect, the judgement itself sets a precedent: spyware firms can be held directly accountable in US courts, regardless of the state affiliations of their customers.
In doing so, the case reframes digital privacy not merely as a user expectation, but as a civil right and signals that the impunity long enjoyed by private surveillance actors is coming to an end.
Florida Rejects Controversial Encryption Backdoor Bill
By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | May 13, 2025
Legislators in the US state of Florida have shot down a bid to introduce a law that would have mandated encryption backdoors.
The outcome of the effort – known as SB 868: Social Media Use by Minors – means that the backdoors would have allowed encryption to be weakened in this fundamental way affecting all platforms where minors might choose to open an account.
As the fear-mongering campaign against encryption is being reiterated over and over again, it’s worth repeating – there is no known way of undermining encryption for any one category of users, without leaving the entire internet open and at the mercy of anything from government spies, to plain criminals.
And that affects both people’s communications and transactions.
Not to mention that while framing such radical proposals as needed for a declaratively equally large goal to achieve – the safety of youth online – in reality, by shuttering encryption, young people and everyone else are negatively affected.
If anything, it would make everyone online less secure, and, by nature of the world – young people more so than others.
And so, Florida’s Senate on announced that SB 868 is now “indefinitely postponed and withdrawn from consideration.”
The idea behind the proposal was to allow law enforcement access to communications on a social platform – by forcing a company to build in backdoors any time law enforcement came up either with a warrant – or merely a subpoena.
The focus of the bill was “ephemeral” messages – as in, preventing those defined as minors from using the associated features. At the same time, their parents or guardians would have “full access” to their online activities.
“Dangerous and dumb” – is how the digital rights groups Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) earlier summed up and alliterated the proposal.
The US, and its individual states, are not the only ones attempting to create a chink in the armor of global online security by repeatedly attacking online encryption.
Thus far, cooler heads seem to be prevailing, but the battle is far from over, as this fundamental piece of online security continues to be in the crosshairs of, most of the time, authorities hungry for ever-easier ways to conduct ever more invasive mass surveillance.
EU Council pushes overhaul to expand speech regulation, target influencers, and tighten control over online platforms
By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | May 14, 2025
As the European Union lays the groundwork for a sweeping overhaul of its audiovisual media regulations, the European Council is doubling down on its campaign to police online speech, draped in the familiar language of “safety” and “harm reduction.”
In a set of draft conclusions ahead of the 2026 review of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD), the Council is urging the European Commission to expand regulatory oversight over video-sharing platforms like YouTube and TikTok, demanding stricter measures to counter what it vaguely labels “disinformation” and “societal risks.”
We obtained a copy of the draft conclusions for you here.
Under the surface of these bureaucratic formulations lies an unmistakable effort to entrench centralized control over online speech across the EU. While dressed as a protective measure, especially toward children and young people, the Council’s recommendations represent a coordinated push to tighten the screws on independent voices, alternative narratives, and the chaotic, open nature of internet communication.
Wrapped in vague definitions and bolstered by expanding EU digital legislation, these proposals are paving the way for a more surveilled, less spontaneous digital public sphere.
Particularly troubling is the call for the Commission to “engage regularly with Member States” to assess how very large online platforms (VLOPs) comply with self-regulatory codes meant to eliminate what the EU designates as “harmful content.”
This not only formalizes political pressure on private platforms to suppress speech but does so under a self-justifying cycle where the same institutions define both the problem and the acceptable solution.
The Council also throws its weight behind efforts to classify influencers and independent content creators as formal audiovisual media providers. If adopted, such a move would bring an entire ecosystem of decentralized communication under a regulatory regime designed for legacy broadcasters. This is not about leveling the playing field. It is about reining in anyone who communicates outside the narrow channels of state-sanctioned media.
“In an ever-changing media landscape, we need rules that are both robust and adaptable,” stated Hanna Wróblewska, Polish Minister for Culture and National Heritage.
“Today’s conclusions highlight the most pressing challenges facing the EU’s audiovisual media sector and call for an approach that will ensure all our citizens are protected from harmful content for years to come.” The sentiment may sound benign, but in practice, “robust” rules often translate into bureaucratic tools for censorship, and “adaptability” into a blank check for regulators to constantly redraw the boundaries of permissible expression.
The Council’s emphasis on combating “foreign information manipulation and interference” (FIMI) also deserves scrutiny. While it invokes threats from abroad, the solutions offered inevitably point inward, toward greater institutional control over speech flows within Europe. The specter of “foreign influence” has long served as a justification to erode civil liberties, and in this context, it becomes a pretext to further entangle state actors in decisions about what citizens can see, share, and say.
The AVMSD was never intended to be a speech-regulating weapon. It was built to coordinate standards across media markets, not dictate what truths may circulate. Yet the Council’s conclusions betray a shift away from this principle, echoing a broader authoritarian drift in the EU’s digital policymaking. Initiatives like the Digital Services Act and the European Media Freedom Act are increasingly being used to empower unelected bodies to interfere in editorial processes and curate public discourse under the banner of safety.
Calls for “media literacy,” “pluralism,” and “support for journalistic standards” now serve as euphemisms for state-aligned narratives. Rather than equipping citizens to think critically, these measures promote compliance with officially approved information streams while marginalizing dissent, satire, and counter-establishment viewpoints.
The Deep State Goes Viral: Foreword
By Jeffrey A Tucker | Brownstone Institute | May 12, 2025
The following is Jeffrey Tucker’s Foreword introduction to Debbie Lerman’s new book, The Deep State Goes Viral: Pandemic Planning and the Covid Coup.
It was about a month into lockdowns, April 2020, and my phone rang with an unusual number. I picked up and the caller identified himself as Rajeev Venkayya, a name I knew from my writings on the 2005 pandemic scare. Now the head of a vaccine company, he once served as Special Assistant to the President for Biodefense, and claimed to be the inventor of pandemic planning.
Venkayya was a primary author of “A National Strategy for Pandemic Influenza” as issued by the George W. Bush administration in 2005. It was the first document that mapped out a nascent version of lockdowns, designed for global deployment. “A flu pandemic would have global consequences,” said Bush, “so no nation can afford to ignore this threat, and every nation has responsibilities to detect and stop its spread.”
It was always a strange document because it stood in constant contradiction to public health orthodoxies dating back decades and even a century. With it, there were two alternative paths in place in the event of a new virus: the normal path that everyone is taught in medical school (therapeutics for the sick, caution with social disturbances, calm and reason, quarantines only in extreme cases) and a biosecurity path that invoked totalitarian measures.
Those two paths existed side-by-side for a decade and a half before the lockdowns.
Now I found myself speaking with the guy who claims credit for having mapped out the biosecurity approach, which contradicted all public health wisdom and experience. His plan was finally being implemented. Not too many voices dissented, partially due to fear but also due to censorship, which was already very tight. He told me to stop objecting to the lockdowns because they have everything under control.
I asked a basic question. Let’s say we all hunker down, hide under the sofa, eschew physical meetings with family and friends, stop all gatherings of all kinds, and keep businesses and schools closed. What, I asked, happens to the virus itself? Does it jump in a hole in the ground or head to Mars for fear of another press conference by Andrew Cuomo or Anthony Fauci?
After some fallacy-filled banter about the R-naught, I could tell he was getting exasperated with me, and finally, with some hesitation, he told me the plan. There would be a vaccine. I balked and said that no vaccine can sterilize against a fast-mutating respiratory pathogen with a zoonotic reservoir. Even if such a thing did appear, it would take 10 years of trials and testing before it was safe to release to the general population. Are we going to stay locked down for a decade?
“It will come much faster,” he said. “You watch. You will be surprised.”
Hanging up, I recall dismissing him as a crank, a has-been with nothing better to do than call up poor writers and bug them.
I had entirely misread the meaning, simply because I was not prepared to understand the sheer depth and vastness of the operation now in play. All that was taking place struck me as obviously destructive and fundamentally flawed but rooted in a kind of intellectual error: a loss of understanding of virology basics.
Around the same time, the New York Times posted without fanfare a new document called PanCAP-A: Pandemic Crisis Action Plan – Adapted. It was Venkayya’s plan, only intensified, as released on March 13, 2020, three days before President Trump’s press conference announcing the lockdowns. I read through it, reposted it, but had no idea what it meant. I hoped someone could come along to explain it, interpret it, and tease out its implications, all in the interest of getting to the bottom of the who, what, and why of this fundamental attack on civilization itself.
That person did come along. She is Debbie Lerman, intrepid author of this wonderful book that so beautifully presents the best thoughts on all the questions that had eluded me. She took the document apart and discovered a fundamental truth therein. The rule-making authority for the pandemic response was not vested in public-health agencies but the National Security Council.
This was stated as plain as day in the document; I had somehow missed that. This was not public health. It was national security. The antidote under development with the label vaccine was really a military countermeasure. In other words, this was Venkayya’s plan times ten, and the idea was precisely to override all tradition and public health concerns and replace them with national security measures.
Realizing this fundamentally changes the structure of the story of the last five years. This is not a story of a world that mysteriously forgot about natural immunity and made some intellectual error in thinking that governments could shut down economies and turn them back on again, scaring a pathogen back to where it came from. What we experienced in a very real sense was quasi-martial law, a deep-state coup not only on a national but on an international level.
These are terrifying thoughts and hardly anyone is prepared to discuss them, which is why Lerman’s book is so crucial. In terms of public debate about what happened to us, we are barely at the beginning. There is now a willingness to admit that the lockdowns did more overall harm than good. Even the legacy media has started venturing out to grant permission for such thoughts. But the role of the pharmaceuticals in driving the policy and the role of the national-security state in backing this grand industrial project is still taboo.
In 21st-century journalism and advocacy designed to influence the public mind, the overwhelming concern of all writers and institutions is professional survival. That means fitting into an approved ethos or paradigm regardless of the facts. This is why Lerman’s thesis is not debated; it is hardly spoken of at all in polite society. That said, my work at Brownstone Institute has put me in close contact with many thinkers in high places. This much I can say: what Lerman has written in this book is not disputed but admitted in private.
Strange isn’t it? We saw during the Covid years how professional aspiration incentivized silence even in the face of egregious violations of human rights, including mandatory school closures that robbed children of education, followed by face-covering requirements and forced injections for the whole population. The near-silence was deafening even if anyone with a brain and a conscience knew that all of this was wrong. Not even the excuse that “We didn’t know” works anymore because we did know.
This same dynamic of social and cultural control is fully in operation now that we are through that stage and onto another one, which is precisely why Lerman’s findings have not yet made their way to polite society, to say nothing of mainstream media. Will we get there? Maybe. This book can help; at least it is now available for everyone brave enough to confront the facts. You will find herein the most well-documented and coherent presentation of answers to the core questions (what, how, why) that all of us have been asking since this hell was first visited upon us.
Michigan AG Pins Blame for Failed Prosecutions of Student Protesters on Rep. Debbie Dingell
The Michigan attorney general provided no evidence for her claim, which Dingell rejected
By Ryan Grim and Tom Perkins | Drop Site | May 11, 2025
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel continues to do damage control in the wake of her failed prosecution of student protesters at the University of Michigan. Nessel was forced to drop charges against students who had been arrested at a pro-Palestinian encampment last year after the judge overseeing the case indicated he was sympathetic to the defense’s argument that Nessel had been improperly biased against the defendants.
This week, in public remarks on the prosecution, she claimed without evidence that Democratic Rep. Debbie Dingell of Michigan had been the one who urged her to charge students involved in protests over Gaza. Pinning the pressure for the prosecutions on Dingell was Nessel’s way of arguing that the bias claims made against her were inaccurate—that she was not in fact pushed to take the cases by donors to her campaign who serve as senior officials at the university, but rather by the local congresswoman, Dingell.
“I heard it was from the Jewish Regents,”—that is, the Jewish members of the University of Michigan Board of Regents—“they forced me to take these cases,” Nessel said at an event this week called a “Town Hall on Hate Crimes & Extremism” in West Bloomfield Township. “I heard it was from the [Michigan Legislative] Jewish Caucus because of the money I get from them. I heard it was from Jewish donors. You know how those cases came to my office? Debbie Dingell. Debbie Dingell, I don’t know if you know this: Not Jewish. But it had to be some sort of Jewish influence.”
In a statement to Drop Site, Dingell spokesperson Michaela Johnson suggested the congresswoman was not behind the investigations, pointing to a May 2024 letter from Nessel’s office to the university in which Nessel offered to take over any investigations. The letter, which has not previously been reported, makes no reference to Dingell, but instead suggests that protests outside the homes of Board of Regents members triggered Nessel to launch an effort targeting student protesters.
“Nessel did not write the letter at our request, and Rep. Dingell had not seen that letter until today,” Johnson said. Dingell represents Ann Arbor, but previously represented Dearborn until redistricting in 2014, and she still has strong ties to the Arab-American community there. But she has remained largely silent with regard to the protests.
Amir Makled, an attorney for some of the students, said he called Dingell’s office on Friday to ask about Nessel’s allegations. He said a Dingell staffer denied the congresswoman had pushed for the investigation.
Makled said he didn’t think it was done at Dingell’s behest, but he said Dingell has been involved with the discussions because the incident occurred in her district, and she “has been giving lip service to all sides.”
But, he added, “Nessel is trying to do anything to deflect blame for her office’s misdeeds – that much seems clear to me.”
Nessel’s office didn’t respond to a request for comment over the weekend.
The university, its regents and Nessel have denied that the school recruited the attorney general.
This was not the first time Nessel had pointed the finger at Dingell. She told a local reporter several weeks ago that “the congresswoman from the 6th Congressional District” – Dingell – had put her up to it. “I stand behind the evidence and I stand behind the charges, and I appreciate the fact that this matter was referred by the congresswoman from the 6th Congressional District, who asked the state to intervene because they were concerned about what was happening on campus,” she said. “I believe what we did was the right thing, and that will be borne out in court.”
Following that report, supporters of the students who’d been charged approached Dingell at an event on March 3 to ask if Nessel’s allegation was true. According to an audio recording provided to Drop Site, it was not. “She’s told a lot of people a lot of stuff,” Dingell told the students. She was then asked directly by Jared Eno, a grad student at Michigan, if that was true: “No!” Dingell said. “She called the university and offered.” The letter supports that claim.
Nessel, in her remarks at the town hall, again claimed Rep. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan had accused her of bias linked to her Jewish background, but Tlaib’s public statements have never referenced this. “I think people at the University of Michigan put pressure on her to do this, and she fell for it,” Tlaib had said. “I think President Ono and Board of Regent members were very much heavy-handed in this.” UMich President Santa Ono, the only person Tlaib named as having applied pressure to Nessel, is not Jewish.
The AG letter was sent to Timothy G. Lynch, vice president and general counsel at the University of Michigan, and signed by Danielle Hagaman-Clark, a prosecutor in Nessel’s office. “I write today to offer the DAG’s assistance with investigating and prosecuting any cases that arise from the recent demonstrations on UM’s campus,” she wrote. “It has been widely reported that the demonstrators have not limited their protests to the campus but have also appeared at the homes of the Board of Regents. My understanding is that the Regents are not required to live in Washtenaw County, the location of UM, but that they reside in several different counties. Because the DAG has state-wide criminal authority to bring charges, we are ideally situated to review any potential cases.”
The reference to the protests outside the homes of Regents matches reporting that suggested those demonstrations, even more than the encampments, enraged the board members, who urged Nessel to prosecute.
Nessel’s prosecutor added her office was well suited to determine whether any of the speech from the protesters was illegal. “I would also note that our Department has specialized expertise in the intersection of First Amendment free speech rights in the context of a criminal prosecution. We are fluent in the law around what speech is protected and what speech is not protected,” said Hagaman-Clark, making the pitch to Michigan. The letter was sent shortly after local prosecutor Eli Savit (who is also Jewish) declined to prosecute 36 of 40 protesters arrested in connection with the occupation of an administration building, and recommended four others for diversion. “General Nessel has discussed the potential jurisdictional issues that might arise with Washtenaw County Prosecutor Eli Savit. Prosecutor Savit recognizes that his authority is confined to Washtenaw County. He is comfortable with the DAG overseeing these cases based on his jurisdiction being limited to only Washtenaw County.”
In her effort at damage control this week, Nessel claimed Dingell’s supposed request was common. “Now it’s not unusual for a congressional representative to call up the department of the attorney general and to call the attorney general herself and say ‘I’m really worried about what I see to be criminal activity occurring and either the local prosecutor is not doing anything about it,’ or ‘they’re not equipped to do anything about it. But I am scared about what I am seeing. And I think the AG’s office has to take action.’”
Nessel also told the town hall audience that she dropped the charges because the judge had ordered an evidentiary hearing into the defense’s charge that Nessel was biased against the defendants. Defense attorneys, in their recent motion to disqualify Nessel’s office over bias, pointed to a previous analysis that found she had prosecuted protesters at a much higher rate than other prosecutors in the state.
They also pointed to Nessel recusing herself from an investigation into alleged election fraud by Muslim-American city council members in nearby Hamtramck. Nessel said she wanted to avoid the appearance of bias because she was Jewish and the suspects were of Arab descent. She also noted that she had previously been critical of the Hamtramck City Council. In their motion to disqualify Nessel’s office, defense attorneys questioned how she could consider herself biased in Hamtramck but unbiased in Ann Arbor under similar circumstances.
A letter sent by the Jewish Federation of Ann Arbor to the judge urging him to allow her to remain on the case, she said, put improper pressure on the judge and should not have been sent. And the cases against the students were becoming a distraction to staff, she added, who couldn’t even attend a job fair without being “shut down by protesters.”
“We elected that rather than me being put on trial for being a Jewish prosecutor, and rather than having the federation be put on trial for an email they should not have sent—but the kind that gets sent all the time—that we would dismiss the charges against those particular defendants,” she said. An evidentiary hearing would have opened her office to discovery and made public communications about how the cases came together. Defense attorneys say she wanted to avoid that.
Liz Jacob, an attorney from the Sugar Law Center, said the claim from Nessel was another effort to deflect responsibility. “It’s alarming to see the ways that Nessel is trying to avoid accountability for her repression of free speech and brutal targeting of protesters at all costs,” Jacob said. “Both in that video and over the last several months AG Nessel has tried to blame anyone—from Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib to Debbie Dingell to the Jewish Federation of Greater Ann Arbor—to deflect criticism regarding her own deplorable treatment of pro-Palestine protesters.”
Nessel’s decision was a serious one, and Nessel should treat it seriously, Jacob said. “As the Attorney General who is directing the FBI to raid protesters homes and bringing baseless and retaliatory criminal charges against protesters, it is Nessel who must bear responsibility for targeting young people who bravely speak out against war and genocide. Nessel’s actions speak for themselves — she has aligned herself with the Trump administration’s criminalization and repression of pro-Palestine speech,” she said.
Featured Video
Iran Walks Out On Peace Deal Due To Trump’s Threats
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
As Hillary Clinton kisses up to Henry Kissinger, RT looks at 4 of his most heinous acts
RT | September 3, 2016
… While Clinton retains the ultimate warmongering seal, RT examines some of Kissinger’s most memorable acts… Read full article
Blog Roll
Aletho News- IRAN WALKS OUT ON PEACE DEAL DUE TO TRUMP’S THREATS – w/ Prof. Seyed Mohammad Marandi
- Moderna’s mRNA Flu Vaccine Gets Unanimous Thumbs-Up Despite Risks, Low Efficacy
- UK Speech Regulator’s Telegram Questions Point Toward Private Chats
- Cuban FM blasts Rubio for ‘chronically lying’ about US fuel blockade
- Al-Jazeera demands punishment for Israeli officials following latest assassination of cameraman
- Iran opens hundreds of legal cases over US, Israeli aggression: Prosecutor general
- Iran delegation protests Trump’s threat at Switzerland talks, weighs ‘proper’ response: Source
- Terms of US capitulation to Iran presage new era for the region
- Strategic Oil Reserve Nears Collapse… US Must Choose: Guns or Butter
- The Story the Media — and the Government — Don’t Want You to Hear
- If Americans Knew
- JNS Policy Summit to kick off in Israel
- Fatalities From Israel’s Vast Gaza Genocide Deliberately Undercounted
- ‘Reproductive genocide’ in Gaza; death toll in Lebanon tops 4,000 (during a ceasefire) – Daily Update
- Israelis Invaded Lebanon And Then Cried Victim When Their Soldiers Got Killed
- FARA Docs: Israel is Spying On Millions Of Christian Americans In Their Churches
- Why US presidents from both parties end up cursing Benjamin Netanyahu
- Israel Asked Facebook to Censor Iran War Content, Internal Documents Show
- Deaths in Gaza undercounted, possibly by 100s of thousands; “Psychopath” Ben-Gvir talks trash – Daily Update
- UNICEF: “Trauma is woven into the very fabric of childhood in Gaza”
- 15 articles a day: The extent of the Israeli army’s media interference
- No Tricks Zone
- THE TRANSCEIVER PARADOX: Why Organoid Intelligence (OI) Could Become Our Ultimate Alien Predator
- German Wind Turbines Face Regulatory Shutdown Due To Excessive Noise
- New Study: Chile’s Relative Sea Level Was 3.2 Meters Higher Than Today During The Mid-Holocene
- Beyond The Pitch: Why FIFA’s World Cup Is One Of Humanity’s Best Investments
- Climate Alarmists Now Using Natural Phenomena To Support Their Claims
- New Study: Significant CO2 Fluxes From Non-Volcanic Sources Are Largely Neglected In Carbon Budgets
- Women Climate Scientists Being Harassed, Insulted By Skeptics, Claims Berkeley Earth Researcher
- Germany’s Longterm Spring Climate Data Show “No Climate Trend”
- New Study: Solar Photovoltaic, Wind Power Fail To Meet Annual Energy Demands 62% Of The Time
- Germany’s Die Welt: “Too Much Is Too Much” … Green Energies Are Cannabalizing Each Other!
Aletho News 