Gaza Under Siege: Aid Cut off as US President Trump’s Remarks Threaten Ceasefire
Al-Manar | February 11, 2025
As the drained Gaza Strip faces severe restrictions on humanitarian aid, including the blocking of vital fuel supplies, US President Donald Trump’s recent statements add further tension to an already volatile situation.
An article in the Israeli Haaretz newspaper describes Trump’s recent statements and interventions as ‘tempting fate’, warning that they could derail the ceasefire agreement in Gaza and disrupt the prisoner exchange process.
Zionist analyst Amos Harel, writing for Haaretz, refers to Trump as an “unpredictable force” whose actions risk intensifying the crisis. Trump’s call for the release of prisoners in a single batch, diverging from the previously agreed incremental approach, represents a radical shift in negotiations that could have dangerous consequences.
While many in the Zionist entity, particularly those supporting the prisoner exchange deal, had placed their hopes on Trump, Harel notes that they now share the “painful frustration” previously felt by critics, especially those from the right-wing factions.
Rising Right-Wing Optimism and Potential Fallout
The article further highlights how right-wing factions in the Zionist entity have embraced Trump’s remarks, seeing them as an opening for Zionist Prime Minister Netanyahu to retract his commitments and take military action against Hamas. However, Harel cautions that such action could lead to the deaths of dozens of prisoners still held in Gaza.
In conclusion, Harel dismisses the right-wing optimism surrounding Trump’s intervention, stressing that military force is unlikely to change Hamas’s stance, particularly as the group has nothing left to lose.
He suggests that Trump’s motivations may include securing a significant regional achievement, such as ending the Gaza conflict, facilitating normalization with the Israeli enemy’s regional neighbors, or even securing a Nobel Peace Prize.
Limited Aid and Severe Shortages
In a blatant escalation of restrictions, Israeli occupation forces have blocked the entry of commercial fuel into Gaza, despite clear stipulations in the humanitarian protocol.
Sources within Gaza confirmed to Al-Jazeera that the occupation has also halted the supply of fuel for essential services, including civil defense and municipal vehicles required for crucial road repairs and debris removal.
Additionally, no commercial fuel has been allowed to enter the enclave, exacerbating the ongoing humanitarian crisis.
The same sources revealed that only around 53,000 tents have been allowed into Gaza out of the agreed 200,000, and none of the 60,000 caravans required for shelter have been delivered. They also noted that only 4 heavy vehicles have been permitted to enter for debris removal and body retrieval, despite the sector’s need for 500 such vehicles.
In addition, the Israeli occupation has prevented the entry of construction materials needed for rebuilding hospitals and civil defense centers. Gaza’s Rashid Street remains closed to vehicles, and crossing checks continue on Salah Al-Din Street following the expiration of the 22-day deadline. No power station equipment has been allowed to enter, hindering repairs and the restoration of the power grid.
Ohio Northern Sues Professor Scott Gerber for Defending His Rights in Court
By Ben Squires | Reclaim The Net | February 9, 2025
Ohio Northern University (ONU) is facing legal battles on multiple fronts after firing Professor Scott Gerber following his outspoken opposition to the school’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies. The controversy has now escalated into a federal lawsuit, with the university suing Gerber after he took legal action to challenge his dismissal.
Gerber, a tenured professor and longtime critic of ONU’s DEI initiatives, became the subject of an administrative investigation in January 2023. Despite repeated requests, ONU refused to disclose the specific accusations against him. When he was finally informed of his alleged failure to maintain “collegiality,” free speech advocacy group FIRE argued that this charge resembled retaliation for his views on DEI, potentially violating ONU’s commitment to academic freedom.
In April 2023, ONU ordered campus police to remove Gerber from his classroom and escort him to the dean’s office, where he was pressured to resign immediately. Gerber refused, and the university terminated his employment. A state judge later criticized ONU’s “callous disregard for due process” and allowed Gerber’s breach of contract case to proceed to trial, citing the school’s “troubling” lack of justification for his termination.
Instead of addressing concerns raised in court, ONU responded by suing Gerber in federal court on Jan. 20, alleging that his lawsuit was a “perverted” effort to “unleash political retribution” against the university. The lawsuit accuses Gerber of attempting to “manufacture outrage” and claims his legal challenge constitutes an unlawful “abuse of process.”
A key aspect of ONU’s complaint is Gerber’s public statements regarding his firing. The university objects to his writings in The Wall Street Journal and a press release from his attorneys at America First Legal, dismissing them as a “manufactured narrative.” However, Gerber and his legal team maintain that their statements rely on ONU’s own records and policies, which the state court has deemed sufficient to warrant trial.
Critics have condemned ONU’s lawsuit as a classic example of a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP)—a legal tactic intended to silence dissent by burdening individuals with costly litigation. By forcing Gerber to defend himself in federal court while preparing for his state trial, ONU’s actions raise broader concerns about the use of legal intimidation against faculty members.
“Professors should not have to go to court to defend their right to free speech,” said a spokesperson for FIRE. “And universities should not be using litigation to silence their critics.”
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) notes:
“Disturbingly, the crux of ONU’s complaint rests on Gerber’s protected speech. The university faults Gerber for expressing accurate information about his ordeal in the Wall Street Journal and through a press release published by his attorneys at America First Legal, maligned by ONU as a “manufactured narrative” designed to “manufacture outrage.” Yet Gerber and America First Legal cite the university’s own words and policies to make his case, which a state court has allowed to proceed by rejecting ONU’s efforts to dismiss his claims.”
Israel expands shooting orders in West Bank, adding to Palestinian death toll

Press TV – February 10, 2025
Israel has expanded shooting orders for its soldiers in the occupied West Bank in a move that has generated a high Palestinian death toll.
According to Haaretz newspaper, the so-called central command decided to implement the same shooting policy used during the campaign of genocide in Gaza to kill any unarmed Palestinian in the West Bank.
The Israeli soldiers taking part in the ongoing military assault said commander Avi Blot permitted them to shoot with the intent to kill Palestinians without resorting to arresting them.
“The orders made it easier for soldiers to pull the trigger at the behest of Central Command Commander Avi Blot.”
The head of the West Bank Division Yaki Dolf ordered soldiers to shoot at any vehicle “coming from a combat zone” and heading toward a checkpoint.
On Sunday, two Palestinians were killed in the West Bank when Israeli soldiers opened fire on a car approaching a military checkpoint.
Israeli forces earlier shot and killed an eight-month Palestinian pregnant mother and her unborn baby during a raid in the Nur Shams refugee camp.
According to the Israeli daily, soldiers used Palestinian civilians as human shields while searching buildings for explosives, the same tactic used by the military in Gaza.
Since January 21, the Israeli regime has conducted military operations in Jenin, Tulkarm and Tammun in the northern West Bank. The regime has killed more than 30 Palestinians, according to the Health Ministry.
Israeli soldiers had earlier revealed appalling accounts of the notorious “kill zone” in the Netzarim corridor of the besieged Gaza Strip.
Trump claims US will ‘buy and own’ Gaza, says Palestinians have ‘no alternative’
The Cradle | February 10, 2025
US President Donald Trump said he is “committed to buying and owning” the Gaza Strip and expelling the two million Palestinians living there, amid condemnation from Palestinians and the UN.
“I’m committed to buying and owning Gaza. As far as us rebuilding it, we may give it to other states in the Middle East to build sections of it. Other people may do it through our auspices. But we’re committed to owning it, taking it, and making sure that Hamas doesn’t move back,” Trump said while speaking to reporters during a flight on Air Force One on 9 February.
Trump did not explain who he would buy Gaza from or how the US would own it.
“There’s nothing to move back into. The place is a demolition site … The remainder will be demolished … But we’ll make it into a very good site for future development by somebody,” the US president declared.
Trump promised to “take care of the Palestinians.”
He said, “We’re going to make sure they live beautifully and in harmony and peace and that they’re not murdered … They don’t want to go back to Gaza. They only go back because they have no alternative.”
Trump did not mention who might murder Palestinians or why they might not have an alternative to return to their lands and destroyed homes.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised Trump’s proposal as “revolutionary and creative” despite the plan being met with severe international backlash.
Israel relentlessly bombed Gaza for 15 months, killing at least 48,000 Palestinians, before the ceasefire went into effect on 19 January. Some estimates suggest Israeli forces may have killed over 200,000 Palestinians, largely with the help of US-supplied bombs.
As part of the so-called Generals’ Plan beginning in October, Israeli forces attempted for several months to besiege, starve, and bomb hundreds of thousands of Palestinians in north Gaza to forcibly expel them to the strip’s south.
Trump stated that people from all over the world would be able to move to Gaza, adding that he might allow regional countries to be involved in rebuilding parts of the territory and that he would make sure the Palestinian refugees would “live beautifully.”
The US president’s political allies in Israel, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and former national security minister Itamar Ben Gvir, openly advocate ethnically cleansing Gaza of Palestinians, confiscating the strip’s land, and relocating Jewish settlers there.
Both the Palestinian Authority (PA) and the resistance movement Hamas condemned Trump’s plan.
“The rights of our people and our land are not for sale, exchange or bargaining,” the PA Foreign Ministry said, adding that “The Israeli government and Prime Minister Netanyahu are trying to cover up the crimes of genocide, forced displacement, and annexation which they have committed against our people.”
Hamas political official Izzat al-Rishq affirmed that “Gaza is not a property to be sold and bought. It is an integral part of our occupied Palestinian land.”
The UN Human Rights Office warned that any forcible transfer in, or deportation of, people from occupied territory was strictly prohibited under international law.
US voters are also skeptical of Trump’s plan. A CBS poll showed that 47 percent of US citizens believe that US control of the Gaza Strip is a “bad idea,” only 13 percent think it is a good idea, and 40 percent say they are not sure.
Trump also told journalists while flying on Air Force One that he was “losing patience” with the ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas after seeing footage of the resistance movement releasing Israeli captives over the weekend.
“They look like Holocaust survivors. They were in horrible condition. They were emaciated … I don’t know how much longer we can take that … at some point, we’re going to lose our patience.”
At the same time, freed Palestinian prisoner Sami Jaradat told Anadolu Agency that he and other Palestinian prisoners were terrorized and subjected to humiliation, severe beatings, and deliberate starvation.
“I have lost more than 30 kilograms of my weight,” Jaradat said.
Palestinian prisoners and detainees are also often tortured and raped by their Israeli captors.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) alleges that Prime Minister Netanyahu and former defense minister Yoav Gallant have committed war crimes by using starvation as a weapon against Palestinians.
The ICC issued arrest warrants for the Israeli leaders in November, who imposed a “total siege” on Gaza at the beginning of the war in October 2023, blocking food, water, and fuel from entering the enclave.
Are U.S. Taxpayers Funding ‘Corrupt Dark-money Network’ That Censored CHD, RFK Jr. and Others?
By Brenda Baletti, Ph.D. | The Defender |February 7, 2025
A new analysis of government spending revealed that several major U.S. taxpayer-funded organizations are linked to the U.K.-based Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), according to a Substack report by Sayer Ji of GreenMedInfo.
CCDH, an influential nonprofit anti-disinformation organization, authored “The Disinformation Dozen” list. The group allegedly collaborated with U.S. and foreign governments and Big Tech to censor Ji, Children’s Health Defense (CHD), Robert F. Kennedy Jr., CHD founder and former chairman, and others for spreading “disinformation.”
A new analysis of government spending published by DataRepublican.com showed that at least 17 heavily taxpayer-funded U.S. organizations also may have funneled money into CCDH’s operations, Ji reported.
“The revelation that so many U.S.-based organizations are funding CCDH confirms what many of us have been warning about: that censorship efforts are not merely private initiatives but part of a broader, coordinated strategy involving government-linked entities and foreign influence networks,” Ji told The Defender.
Ji said this provides more evidence that censorship is being outsourced, “creating a system of plausible deniability for those seeking to silence dissenting voices under the guise of combating ‘misinformation.’”
CCDH famously drafted a list of the so-called “Disinformation Dozen” — which included Ji, founder of the natural health website GreenMedInfo ; Kennedy; Dr. Joseph Mercola; and Ty and Charlene Bollinger, founders of The Truth About Vaccines and The Truth About Cancer websites.
CCDH alleged in its report that just 12 accounts produced the majority of “anti-vaccine … disinformation” on social media.
Meta investigated and dismissed the report, and released a statement that there “isn’t any evidence” to support the report’s claims and that the small sample used in CCDH’s analysis was “in no way representative of the hundreds of millions of posts that people have shared about COVID-19 vaccines” on Facebook.
“There is no justification for [CCDH’s] claim that their data constitute a ‘representative sample’ of the content shared across our apps,” Meta stated.
Yet, the report was used by the White House and Twitter, now X, to censor the people and organizations on CCDH’s list, and by legacy media outlets such as NPR, The Guardian and others to discredit the people on the list.
“Twitter Files” documents published in 2023 by investigative journalist Paul D. Thacker detailed how Twitter and the White House used CCHD’s “Disinformation Dozen” report to justify censoring the people on the list.
Last year, reporting by Thacker and Matt Taibbi, based on internal documents leaked by CCDH insiders, revealed that CCDH planned to “kill” X, shut down popular social media accounts on other platforms, censor non-establishment voices and “bring back” attacks on “antivaxx” voices, among other things.
According to the documents, CCDH planned to organize “black ops” against Kennedy, who was a U.S. presidential candidate at the time. The group also planned to pressure Substack to remove COVID-19 vaccine critics Mercola and Alex Berenson from its platform.
The documents reveal that CCDH has pushed for a U.S. social media censorship law akin to the European Union’s “Digital Services Act” and the U.K.’s “Online Safety Act.”
Ji said:
“Despite their baseless claims and accusations, CCDH and similar organizations have had a powerful impact. They have provided the justification for widespread deplatforming, demonetization, and reputational attacks against independent journalists, scientists, and advocates.
“Their reports — often methodologically flawed and politically motivated — are treated as authoritative sources by mainstream media and tech platforms, leading to real-world suppression of speech. The fact that they are now directly linked to potential violations of U.S. election laws raises serious questions about accountability and transparency.”
Who is behind CCDH?
CCDH does not disclose its funders — even though journalists, including Thacker, and a U.S. congressional committee have requested that information.
CCDH also did not respond to The Defender’s request for information on its funding sources.
Imran Ahmed, CCDH’s CEO and founder, previously worked for Merrill Lynch. He was a British Labour Party political operative and is the co-author of “The New Serfdom: The Triumph of Conservative Ideas and How to Defeat Them.”
Ahmed emerged during the pandemic as a “vaccine and disinformation expert,” although he lacked any experience that would qualify him as such, Thacker reported.
The organization’s website states only that it is funded by “philanthropic trusts and members of the public.” It has denied receiving any grants, contracts or funding from the U.S. government.
DataRepublican.com used a financial tracing tool to follow donations made by taxpayer-funded organizations to other nonprofits.
CCDH has a relatively small budget of under $2.5 million. Publicly available information shows where some of those donations come from, including the Tides Foundation, Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund and Schwab Charitable Fund.
However, some of the funding for the organizations making direct donations to CCDH can be traced back to nonprofit and philanthropic organizations that receive major funding from the U.S. government and redistribute that money to other organizations, DataRepublican.com showed.
Some of the 17 organizations that fund CCDH’s direct funders include the National Endowment for Democracy, the sister nonprofit of USAID; Freedom House; the National Democratic Institute; Global Communities; World Vision; Save the Children Federation; Columbia University; Princeton University and others.
Other investigations have also shown that CCDH has connections to key political and Hollywood figures.
For example, a 2023 investigation by Thacker revealed the CCDH received anonymous donations of upwards of $1 million and hired a lobbying firm. A search of the 2021 tax filings of the Schwab Charitable Fund — a donor-advised fund that allows anyone to donate anonymously — revealed a $1.1 million donation to CCDH.
Thacker also discovered that CCDH’s chairman is Simon Clark, a former senior fellow at the Center for American Progress (CAP). He also uncovered ties between CCDH, Ahmed and Hollywood.
A subsequent investigation by Ji traced some of the organizations that financially support CCDH, including several U.K.-based nonprofits affiliated with legacy media organizations, the U.K. government and major philanthropic organizations such as the Open Society Foundations and the Ford Foundation.
“These hidden contributions reveal a coordinated pipeline of financial influence involving U.S. intelligence-adjacent entities, UK Crown interests, and Soros-backed organizations like the Tides Foundation,” Ji wrote.
Questions about the organization’s activities and funding sources led Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) to subpoena CCDH as part of a 2023 congressional investigation into the nonprofit’s censorship-related activities.
The subpoena requested all communications and documents “between or among CCDH, the Executive Branch, or third parties, including social media companies, relating to the identification of groups, accounts, channels, or posts for moderation, deletion, suppression, restriction, or reduced circulation.”
It also requested details about any grants, contracts or funds from the U.S. government, CCDH replied that such information doesn’t exist. However, Ji’s report this week throws that response into question.
Ahmed continues to appear in mainstream media as a critic of X and the Trump administration calling for “transparency and accountability.”
“CCDH’s role as a foreign influence operation masquerading as a ‘nonprofit’ watchdog must be fully investigated,” Ji wrote. “Congress, media and civil rights organizations must demand answers.”
He added:
“This corrupt dark-money network must be exposed and dismantled. CCDH is not a ‘hate speech watchdog’ but a weaponized political hit squad, funded by taxpayer dollars and foreign actors, used to silence voices that challenge establishment power.”
Related stories in The Defender
- Watch: ‘We’re in a Different Era’ of Free Speech Now
- Revealed: Dark Money Funders Behind ‘Disinformation Dozen’ Report
- Congressional Investigation into Authors of ‘Disinformation Dozen’ Intensifies
- Group Behind ‘Disinformation Dozen’ Has Ties to Hollywood, Corporate Dems
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
Jim Jordan Challenges EU Over Its Censorship Laws
By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | February 6, 2025
US House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan has written to the EU Commission’s Executive VP for Technological Sovereignty, Security and Democracy Henna Virkkunen regarding the bloc’s censorship law, the Digital Services Act.
Jordan wants the EU to, by February 13, inform the committee of how it plans to enforce the law when it comes to US tech companies, and also about investigations that are at this time underway, against Meta and X.
Jordan, as usual, doesn’t mince words and has no problem with referring to the DSA as legislation that has “censorship provisions” – to express what he said was the committee’s serious concern over how those might affect free speech in the US.
Here, he was referring to the nature of social platforms that are global, and how they typically use the same set of policies regarding speech – meaning that if those policies were aligned with the EU’s restrictive legislation, the result could be the setting of “de facto global censorship standards.”
Even though for a long time criticized by speech and privacy advocates, the DSA was flying under the radar of the previous White House, now it is emerging as a significant point, as the two sides clash on a number of issues.
Under the DSA, which the EU and the law’s supporters treat as a set of “moderation” rules for the good of the internet – companies can be forced to pay up to six percent of global turnover or even get blocked.
Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, and President Trump have been among those who previously publicly criticized the DSA. Previously, Virkkunen denied that the DSA enabled censorship and even claimed that free speech is “respected and protected” by the law.
Jordan and the commission he heads have been involved in multi-year efforts to expose online censorship practices in the US, but this is not the first time that these investigations have also turned toward the EU.
Last summer, during the presidential campaign in the US, he wrote to then Commissioner for Internal Market Thierry Breton because of this EU official’s scandalous warning issued to Musk regarding a live stream of an interview with then-candidate Trump.
The letter to Virkkunen was reported by Politico, but the EU Commission is yet to publicly comment on its contents.
UK Government Secretly Orders Apple to Build Global iCloud Backdoor, Threatening Digital Privacy Worldwide
The UK government’s extremism is a global threat to privacy, a new report shows
By Christina Maas | Reclaim The Net | February 7, 2025
Imagine waking up one morning to find out your government has demanded the master key to every digital iPhone lock on Earth — without telling anyone. That’s exactly what British security officials have tried to pull off, secretly ordering Apple to build a backdoor into iCloud that would allow them to decrypt any user’s data, anywhere in the world. Yes, not just suspected criminals, not just UK citizens — everyone. And they don’t even want Apple to talk about it.
This breathtakingly authoritarian stunt, first reported by The Washington Post, is one of the most aggressive attempts to dismantle digital privacy ever attempted by a so-called Western democracy. It’s the kind of thing you’d expect from regimes that plaster their leader’s face on every street corner, not from a country that still pretends to believe in civil liberties.
The Order: Total Access, Zero Oversight
This isn’t about catching a single terrorist or cracking a single case. No, this order — issued in secret last month by Keir Starmer’s Labour government — demands universal decryption capabilities, effectively turning Apple into a surveillance arm of the UK government. Forget warrants, forget oversight, forget even the pretense of targeted investigations. If this order were obeyed, British authorities would have the power to rifle through anyone’s iCloud account at will, no justification required.
The officials pushing for this monstrosity are hiding behind the UK’s Investigatory Powers Act of 2016, a law so Orwellian it’s lovingly referred to as the “Snoopers’ Charter.” This piece of legislative overreach forces tech companies to comply with government spying requests while making it illegal to even disclose that such demands have been made. It’s the surveillance state’s dream—limitless power, zero accountability.
Apple’s Answer: Thanks, But No Thanks
Apple, to its credit, has not rolled over — yet. Instead of turning itself into an informant for MI5, the company is reportedly considering pulling encrypted iCloud storage from the UK entirely. In other words, British users could lose a major security feature because their government is hell-bent on playing digital dictator.
But even that isn’t enough for UK authorities, who aren’t just demanding access to British accounts. They want a skeleton key to iCloud data worldwide, including in the US That’s right—British intelligence, in a stunning display of overreach, is trying to force an American company to compromise American users on American soil.
The “Appeal” Process: A Kafkaesque Farce
Technically, Apple has the right to challenge this order. But in true dystopian fashion, its only option is to plead its case before a secret technical panel, which will then determine if the request is too expensive. If that doesn’t work, Apple can go before a judge, who will decide whether the demand is “proportionate” to the government’s needs. Because if there’s one thing we know about government surveillance, it’s that it’s always reasonable and restrained.
Meanwhile, Apple has refused to comment, likely because doing so would be a criminal offense under UK law. That’s right — even talking about the demand could land Apple executives in legal trouble. Nothing screams “free society” like threatening jail time for discussing government overreach.
Here’s the wider issue: even if Apple were to challenge this draconian demand, it wouldn’t matter. The law requires immediate compliance — meaning that even as Apple fights the order, it would still be forced to hand over the keys in the meantime. It’s the legal equivalent of being forced to serve a prison sentence while appealing your conviction. By the time the courts make a decision, the damage is already done.
Apple, to its credit, saw this Orwellian nightmare coming from a mile away. Last year, it explicitly warned British lawmakers that such a demand would be nothing less than an assault on global privacy. The company made its stance clear:
“There is no reason why the U.K. [government] should have the authority to decide for citizens of the world whether they can avail themselves of the proven security benefits that flow from end-to-end encryption.”
In other words: Who the hell does Britain think it is? The UK government, in its wisdom, apparently believes it should have the power to determine how encryption works for everyone, everywhere, not just in its own backyard. Because why stop at surveillance when you can have global surveillance?
The Official Non-Denial Denial
Of course, when asked about this breathtakingly bold power grab, the UK Home Office fell back on the bureaucrat’s favorite escape hatch: refusing to confirm or deny reality itself.
“We do not comment on operational matters, including for example confirming or denying the existence of any such notices.”
In other words, “We won’t admit we’re demanding this, but we won’t deny it either.” Because why be transparent when you can keep the public guessing?
How the UK Plans to Kill Encryption by Exploiting the Cloud
For those still clinging to the idea that end-to-end encryption will protect their messages from prying eyes, here’s the bad news: the UK government already has a backdoor, and most people don’t even realize it.
Yes, apps like iMessage, WhatsApp, and Signal use end-to-end encryption, meaning only the sender and recipient can read the messages. But the moment you back up those encrypted chats to the cloud? They become fair game. Law enforcement can demand access through legal orders, bypassing encryption entirely.
Apple’s Advanced Data Protection was designed to close this loophole, giving users a way to keep their cloud backups as secure as their messages. And that, of course, is precisely why the UK wants to kill it.
Because for governments that dream of unlimited surveillance, letting people secure their own data is simply unacceptable.
The UK Is Now Outpacing the US in Anti-Privacy Extremism
For years, the US has led the charge in trying to undermine encryption, with the FBI repeatedly demanding backdoors and government officials throwing tantrums whenever a tech company refuses to play ball. But even America has never gone this far.
Now, Britain is attempting to leap ahead, pushing for surveillance powers that would force not just UK companies, but global tech giants to comply — regardless of where their users live. And Apple? It’s just the first target.
Google, which has offered default encrypted backups for Android since 2018, could easily be next. When asked whether the UK or any other government had made similar demands, Google spokesperson Ed Fernandez gave a carefully worded response:
“Google can’t access Android end-to-end encrypted backup data, even with a legal order.”
That’s a fancy way of saying “We don’t have the keys, and we’re not planning to give them up.” But how long until the UK demands that Google build a key, just like it’s demanding from Apple?
And then there’s Meta. WhatsApp’s encrypted backups are another thorn in the side of surveillance-hungry governments. When pressed on whether they had received any secret orders for access, Meta, predictably, refused to comment.
Australian Tribunal Rules Against eSafety Commissioner’s “Informal” Censorship of X Post
By Didi Rankovic | Reclaim The Net | February 7, 2025
An Australian woman whose X post was censored based on what are known as “informal” notices, issued by Australia’s eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant to social platforms, has appealed against the decision and won.
This was more of an uphill battle than getting censorship decisions revoked usually involves: the “informal” nature of the notices means that normally they cannot even be appealed – and eSafety’s main argument was that the appeal should not even be considered.
But the X user, Celine Baumgarten, managed to convince the Administrative Review Tribunal the censorship notice should not be considered “informal” and that her complaint was therefore within the tribunal’s jurisdiction.
Baumgarten’s post from May 2024 detailed a “queer club” in Melbourne that was operating in a primary school, organized for children 8 to 12 years old.
“There is absolutely NO place for any type of LGBTxyz club in a PRIMARY SCHOOL, or any school for that matter,” Baumgarten, herself a bisexual and an activist, wrote at the time, adding, “Children should NOT be learning about sexualities at such a young, impressionable age. This is foul. Leave the kids ALONE.”
Next, in swooped Grant’s office, with what they maintain was no more than a “complaint alert” to X – as opposed to a removal notice – referring to “adult cyber-abuse material” as the reason to have Baumgarten’s post blocked for X users in Australia.
eSafety essentially tried to “sneak in” censorship under the guise of an “informal notice” – aware that an official takedown request was impossible given that they found their own rules were not violated, not in the entirety of their many parts.
X erred on the side of censorship and blocked the post for two months, to then inform Baumgarten this was done “in error.” Interestingly, Instagram, which received the same eSafety notice, ignored it.
And now the tribunal has done much more than vindicate Baumgarten; the judge broke down eSafety’s process to reveal that while asserting that the notice was “informal” and referring to the terms of use X has for itself – the complaint was actually lodged via X’s channels “for use by government authorities to submit valid legal requests for the removal from X of potentially illegal content.”

All this was interpreted by Justice Emilios Kyrou to mean that the censorship notice was clearly official and therefore eligible to be appealed.
Since eSafety prefers what it calls “informal” to “official” takedown notices (several hundred vs. three or four just over the past year), the implication of the ruling could be significant – prompting a review of other such “informal” reports.
Israel used toxic gas to suffocate Palestinian resistance fighters, captives in Gaza’s tunnels, report finds
MEMO | February 7, 2025
Journalist Richard Medhurst Raided and Detained
Richard Medhurst | February 6, 2025
Please help me recover all the gear taken from me with a small donation. Thank you.
PayPal: https://paypal.me/papichulomin
GoFundMe: http://tiny.cc/GoFundMe-Richard
Patreon: patreon.com/richardmedhurst Bitcoin address: bc1qnelpedy2q6qu67485w4wnmcya5am873zwxxvvp Subscribe to Richard Medhurst on other platforms here:
Rumble: https://rumble.com/richardmedhurst
Rokfin: https://rokfin.com/richardmedhurst
Odysee: https://odysee.com/@richardmedhurst
Substack: https://richardmedhurst.substack.com/
Richard Thomas Medhurst (1992) is an independent journalist, political commentator, and analyst from the United Kingdom with a focus on international affairs, US politics, and the Middle East. Medhurst is known for his coverage of the Julian Assange extradition case in London, as one of the only journalists to report on the trial of the WikiLeaks founder from inside the court.
He has also covered the Iran nuclear deal talks on the ground in Vienna. Medhurst was born in Damascus, Syria. His father is English and mother is Syrian. Both his parents served in United Nations Peacekeeping and Observer missions and were among the UN Peacekeepers awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1988. Owing to his parents’ professional mobility, he has lived in Syria, Pakistan, Switzerland, and Austria. He speaks four languages fluently: English, Arabic, French, and German.
As an independent journalist, Medhurst regularly hosts live broadcasts and video reports on his YouTube channel. Previous guests include the Foreign Minister of Venezuela, the Dep Foreign Minister of Iran; the Palestinian, Russian and Cuban ambassadors to the United Nations in Vienna; the former British Ambassador to Syria; and various UN officials, journalists, and more.
Medhurst’s reports and analysis on Yemen, Ukraine, Syria, Niger, Lebanon, Iran, the Israeli occupation in Palestine and its genocide in Gaza have gone viral countless times, racking up millions of views. Richard Medhurst has a combined following of roughly one million people online, and appears regularly on international news outlets including Al Jazeera, WikiLeaks, Black Agenda Report, Al Mayadeen, The Times, LBC, and others.
Richard Medhurst on Twitter:
/ richimedhurst
Richard Medhurst on Instagram:
/ richardtmedhurst
Richard Medhurst on Substack: https://richardmedhurst.substack.com/
