Washington demands NATO allies help ‘systematically dismantle’ ICC: Report
The Cradle | September 10, 2026
Washington is pressing its NATO allies to help “systematically dismantle” the International Criminal Court (ICC) and abandon its mandate, in an effort to shield US officials from war crimes prosecutions and Israeli leaders from accountability over the genocide in Gaza, POLITICO reported on 9 September.
US envoy Matthew Whitaker reportedly delivered the demand behind closed doors in Brussels in mid-July, in front of the alliance’s 32 ambassadors, urging member states to help take the court apart and to walk away from the Rome Statute, three anonymous NATO diplomats told POLITICO.
“We will be watching closely who stands with America,” Whitaker said as he closed his remarks, according to the three diplomats.
Alongside his intervention, the US mission circulated a document to NATO delegations stating “The United States will systematically dismantle the capabilities of the ICC … we firmly request that you immediately take steps to withdraw.”
The paper instructed allies to assess the court as a threat to their own governments, to publicly denounce its mandate as “overreach,” and to halt all material support to it without delay.
It closed by calling for an “end [to] the charade of the ICC once and for all.”
This comes after US State Secretary Marco Rubio announced on 13 July 2026 a sweeping Washington campaign to isolate and dismantle the ICC “brick by brick,” pressuring allied nations hosting US troops to reject the court’s authority or face retaliation, following Trump’s 6 February 2025 executive order that imposed asset freezes and travel restrictions on ICC prosecutors and judges investigating US and Israeli war crimes.
The campaign has already stripped lead prosecutor Karim Khan of his post, following a sustained Israeli effort that weaponized sexual misconduct allegations against him after he issued the November 2024 arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former war minister Yoav Gallant over their leading roles in the Gaza genocide.
UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese was sanctioned in February, after US technology firms complained to the White House about her findings that they were complicit in Gaza.
Nine of the court’s 18 judges and both deputy prosecutors have since been placed under US sanctions.
Douglas Macgregor: U.S. Defeated in Iran & Israel Will Not Survive
Glenn Diesen | September 9, 2026
Douglas Macgregor is a retired Colonel, combat veteran, and former senior advisor to the U.S. Secretary of Defense. Please like, subscribe & share!
Colonel Macgregor’s substack – Trump is not in Hell, Yet: https://substack.com/home/post/p-2140…
Follow Prof. Glenn Diesen:
Substack: https://glenndiesen.substack.com/
X/Twitter: https://x.com/Glenn_Diesen
Patreon:
/ glenndiesen
Support the research by Prof. Glenn Diesen:
PayPal: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/glenn…
Buy me a Coffee: buymeacoffee.com/gdieseng Go Fund Me: https://gofund.me/09ea012f
Buy Diesen merchandise: https://diesen-shop.fourthwall.com/en…
Israeli military court sentences Palestinian journalist to 4 years for ‘incitement’
MEMO | September 9, 2026
An Israeli military court on Tuesday sentenced Palestinian journalist Mahmoud Fatafta to four years in prison on charges of so-called “incitement”, the Palestinian Journalists’ Syndicate said.
The syndicate condemned the sentence in a statement, calling it “a new chapter in the targeting of Palestinian journalists and a systematic attempt to silence voices and suppress freedom of opinion and expression”.
The Israeli army arrested Fatafta on 30 May 2024 while he was passing through the Container checkpoint northeast of Bethlehem in the southern occupied West Bank.
The syndicate said prosecuting journalists in Israeli military courts over their journalistic work or expression of their views was “a flagrant violation of international law and international humanitarian law”. It said the military justice system was being used to punish and intimidate journalists and prevent them from carrying out their professional duties.
It added that the sentence against Fatafta came as part of an ongoing Israeli policy of pursuing, arresting and prosecuting Palestinian journalists in an attempt to “hide the Palestinian narrative and silence voices reporting the truth about what is happening on the ground”.
The syndicate said “incitement” charges had become a broad pretext used by Israeli authorities to pursue journalists, activists and people expressing their views, in violation of the right to freedom of expression and journalistic work.
Iran, Russia, China Demand Guarantees Against Further Attacks on Iranian Nuclear Sites
Sputnik – 09.09.2026
MOSCOW – Iran, Russia and China have demanded guarantees against further attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities, Iran’s mission in Vienna said on Wednesday.
“China, Iran, and Russia, in a joint statement to the [IAEA] BoG [Board of Governors] today, condemned repeated attacks against Iran’s nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards, together with continuing threats of further aggression. In this regard, effective assurances, in particular guarantees of the non-recurrence of such actions, are indispensable for further development of Iran’s cooperation with the Agency,” the mission wrote on X.
The prevailing security conditions have effectively made the normal implementation of IAEA safeguards in Iran impossible, the mission added.
The US and Israel struck a number of Iranian nuclear facilities during the conflict of June 2025. Iranian nuclear sites were also hit during the latest escalation that began in late February 2026. Tehran blamed the US for the strikes.
The IAEA Board of Governors began its regular session on Monday in Vienna. The session, which runs until September 11, will address issues related to the implementation of safeguards in Iran and developments surrounding Iran’s nuclear program.
Iran War Just Got Much Bigger / Matt Bracken & Lt Col Daniel Davis
Daniel Davis / Deep Dive – September 8, 2026
Blaming the Victim in the Gaza Genocide
Amnesty International blames the victim in a time of genocide
By Paul de Rooij • Unz Review • September 8, 2026
The late Dr. Israel Shahak once related that during WWII when a collaborator at the Warsaw ghetto was eliminated, the jubilant inmates (himself included) danced with joy.[0] Maybe the extreme situation didn’t permit the semblance of a legal process, but natural law ran its course. Now imagine if at that time a sanctimonious body were to pop up and chastise the inmates for this “crime”. Under the circumstances, it would appear hypocritical for anyone to criticise the inmates, let alone refer to their action as “unlawful” and demand “accountability”.
Well, Amnesty International just published an article that fits that description in a contemporary setting. It just published a news release, “Hamas must stamp out extrajudicial executions…”[1], which is an indictment of the execution or beatings of collaborators in Gaza. Amnesty’s rumination amounts to blaming the victim.
About Collaborators
For many decades Israel sought to recruit Palestinian collaborators. These were used as an enforcement arm of the oppressor; to inform on the Palestinian society and the resistance; to undermine the cohesion of the society, to sow distrust; act as propaganda agents; and to create dependence on the oppressor. The Israeli desire to destroy the Palestinian society has been ever present.
From the early days prior to the formation of Israel, zionists sought informers and traitors. Bedouins and the “peace bands” acted as trackers to find and eliminate Palestinian fighters. Wealthy Palestinians sold land or acted as agents for the zionists to acquire land. There are gradations of collaboration — from the ones who were involved in violence against their own people, to those engaged in acts that undermined Palestinian society[2].
Today the so-called Palestinian Authority (PA) are collaborators in the Israeli project; they suppress Palestinian resistance, maintain dependence and subjugation, and protect the network of Palestinian collaborators created by Israel. Prominent Palestinians opposed to Israeli oppression have been murdered by the PA; the PA goons have been tasked with suppressing resistance in key areas such as Jenin and Nablus; and PA forces coordinate their actions with Israeli forces.
Israeli prisons use collaborators (aka Asafir) placed in cells together with Palestinian prisoners to get them to divulge information. Asafir collaborators are also used to break the solidarity between prisoners; any activity that might create a spirit of resistance is broken up.
Notorious armed collaborators roam in the West Bank where they harass and intimidate victims at the behest of their handlers. But to create a culture subservient to the Israeli occupation, Palestinians are told to petition the collaborators to obtain permits, access to land or work. The collaborators simply do Israel’s dirty work.
Drug dealing and collaboration go hand in hand. There is a history of Israel supplying drugs and fostering the criminal gangs in Gaza and the West Bank.[3]
Yet another true and tested way to undermine a society. Drug dealers also act as armed enforcers.
It is fairly easy for Israelis to recruit collaborators. Any Palestinian who has to cross a checkpoint is easy prey for Israeli agents to coerce or bribe victims to become collaborators. No cooperation results in blocked access, and thus no work and the like. If a child requires to go to an Israeli hospital or a health facility in Jerusalem, the parents are often confronted with the choice of obtaining a permit by collaborating, or being turned back. Students seeking to go to study abroad are also put in the same quandary, collaborate or have passage denied. There is an upside to collaborating (obtaining access or favours), and the downside is minimal because collaborators aren’t persecuted. So, now there are collaborators everywhere in the West Bank.
Collaborators in Gaza
When Hamas took over Gaza after it won the elections in 2006, it displaced the collaborationist Palestinian Authority. But most of the ejected members of the PA forces, predominantly Fatah members, remained in Gaza and many were willing to collaborate with Israel. The Palestinian resistance has to contend with collaborators who would pinpoint tunnels, weapons or key personnel. Several resistance commanders were likely killed when exposed by collaborators. Hooded collaborators enable the Israeli military to identify and separate Palestinian prisoners who are either in or assist the resistance.
Some collaborators were tasked with spreading false rumours in crowded places. A favourite tactic was for a collaborator to take a shared taxi ride, and then loudly claim that a given official was corrupt or criminal. Others were instructed to paint defeatist or hateful graffiti.
And at present Israel is arming and organising Palestinian criminal gangs to terrorise neighbourhoods to drive people out of their homes. The Middle East Eye reports:[4]
Based on testimony from Israeli soldiers, UN reports and satellite imagery, the investigation found that increasingly well-armed collaborator militias have expelled Palestinians from their homes and carried out operations across Gaza. Israel has trained at least five militia groups, and potentially a sixth, operating from heavily fortified bases inside Israeli-occupied areas of the enclave.
One Israeli soldier described how the state, army and Shin Bet intelligence service send armed and “trained militias to commit war crimes, …”.
One can well understand Palestinian anger against the collaborators’ treasonous and criminal behaviour, and their attempts to poison Palestinian society.
Amnesty on rough justice
Although Israel is responsible for recruiting and exploiting a collaborator network, Amnesty portrays Hamas’ rough justice as “unlawful” and it calls for Hamas to be held accountable. It doesn’t portray the collaborators as an Israeli instrument.
Amnesty portrays the issue of collaborators as one between the Palestinian population at large and Hamas; not as one where Israel is the oppressor, and the Palestinians are the oppressed. And under the circumstances (Amnesty plainly admits there is “a collapse of law and order in Gaza”), how are Palestinians supposed to dispense justice? On the one hand Amnesty wants Hamas to operate under a legal framework, yet it plainly downplays the Israeli violations of most laws that should confer all Palestinians some protection. It is a clear double standard.
Israeli forces have targeted the police and courts. On day one of the 2014 attack, dozens of police were bombed and killed. In the recent past, police have been similarly targeted. So, it seems that Amnesty expects Hamas to operate within a legal framework meant to mediate societal tension in a state of peace. When Hamas establishes that organised crime in Gaza operates in tandem with Israeli forces, then it has the right to defend itself. Amnesty may not like the rough justice this entails, but it has no standing to criticise the way Palestinians defend themselves.
Erika Guevara Rosas, the author of the “Hamas must stamp out extrajudicial executions” article, seems to dismiss the accusations made by Hamas against collaborators. When referring to the collaborators, the article is sprinkled with the usual Amnesty weasel words: “suspected”, “alleged”. The word informant is put in quotation marks. Amnesty confers no credibility to statements made by Hamas. One wonders why Palestinians should be required to justify their actions when Israel carries on with impunity.
A legal argument
Anyone hiring a hitman for an assassination or any serious crime would face severe legal consequences. In the same manner, when Israel hires or coerces collaborators to perpetrate serious crimes, e.g., murder, then the contracting party should also bear severe legal consequences. Alas, this is not an argument that Amnesty understands.
There is a pattern
Most articles/news releases published by Amnesty seem to follow a pattern. One article will criticise Palestinians, and it is shortly thereafter followed by an article which criticises Israel. In the current context, we have the article about execution of collaborators, and it was followed a few days later by an article restating that Israel has done nothing to end the genocide and to abide by the ICJ’s ruling.[5] Amnesty seeks to portray itself as a neutral organisation which sits on the fence criticising “both sides”. Amnesty’s actions are neither proportional to the violence or injustice of the current situation. The reason it takes this dubious stance is because it doesn’t want to be in solidarity with the Palestinians, but it similarly doesn’t want to be antagonistic towards Israelis. The actions of the oppressed and oppressor are held to the same ahistorical standard.
Amnesty and genocide
It took a long time for Amnesty to unequivocally refer to Israeli crimes as genocide. On 28 October 2023, Craig Mokhiber, the former UN official in the High Commission for Human Rights, resigned because his agency was not reacting given the unfolding situation in Gaza, and stated in his resignation letter: “this is a textbook case of genocide”. It was only 13 months later that Amnesty acknowledged the nature of Israeli crimes, thus Amnesty was rather late to announce that Palestinians were subject to a genocidal campaign.[6] But then one would expect more action from “the leading human rights organisation”. Currently, several weeks transpire before it cursorily mentions genocide. It seems that Amnesty’s actions aren’t proportional to the severity of the crime — and to boot, Amnesty will regularly chastise Palestinians for the way they deal with collaborators or protestors.
A matter of timing
There are many egregious cases of Israeli violence or threats to perpetrate heinous acts. On 15 August 2026, Itamar Ben Gvir, the Israeli security minister, stated that he sought to kill 30 to 40 Palestinians every day. The man interviewing him helpfully volunteered to kill with his own bare hands. This is only Ben Gvir’s latest statement about an intent to kill many Palestinians, and he certainly belongs in the same dock as Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant to answer for all their mass crimes. Amnesty’s article chastising Palestinians for the assassination of collaborators coincided with Ben Gvir’s statements about criminal intent. What is worse, the elimination of collaborators or the threat to kill 30 to 40 Palestinians every day? What is surprising is that Amnesty didn’t utter a peep about Ben Gvir’s threats — hardly empty threats.
Human rights are for the birds
Human rights organisations think that they can opine on everything, and they believe that they can offer recommendations to everybody. Alas, the human rights framework is problematic and deficient, and human rights organisations are mostly compromised and propaganda tools for those who pay for them.
When confronted with mass crimes what is needed is justice, and not one of its bastardised, neutered, malleable and ineffective substitutes. If one wants justice then it behooves one to speak in terms of justice, and to avoid the human rights mumbo jumbo. When faced with mass crimes one should demand justice, and not merely seek some bandages. This is specially the case when human rights have been cynically exploited and weaponised by the US and UK. A framework that can be used to justify wars, the so-called humanitarian interventions (even humanitarian bombing!!), cannot be a framework that advances justice or motivates people to act against mass crimes.
Most human rights NGOs don’t even condemn the forever wars, the US/Israeli wars of aggression. Amnesty International is “not an anti-war organisation”.[7] How one can favour human rights and not oppose wars is a mystery. But then Amnesty is against capital punishment, but not opposed to some killing by the military. However, all killings by the Palestinian resistance are condemned or criticised in Amnesty’s weasel-like inimitable style. The same demands don’t apply when Israel bombs refugee camps, or hires, arms and organises collaborators to terrorise and expel the residents of the refugee camps. Here another standard applies.
Amnesty International is not part of the solution; it is part of the problem.
Notes
[0] Frank Collins, “Why Palestinians Kill Palestinians in Israeli-Occupied Territories”, WRMEA, Nov. 1989.https://www.wrmea.org/1989-november/why-palestinians-kill-palestinians-in-israeli-occupied-territories.html
[1] “Palestine: Hamas must stamp out extrajudicial executions and ensure justice for victims”, 21 August 2026.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2026/08/palestine-hamas-must-stamp-out-extrajudicial-executions-and-ensure-justice-for-victims/
[2] A good overview of early Palestinian collaboration see: Joseph Massad , “Palestinian elites have been collaborating against the resistance for a century”, 12 June 2026.
[3] Here is a recent example: Joe Glenton, Israel is smuggling narcotics into Gaza, Palestinian tribal council warns, The Canary, 17 December 2025.
https://www.thecanary.co/global/world-analysis/2025/12/17/israel-narcotics/
[4] Israel arms drug dealers to commit new ‘Sabra and Shatila’ in Gaza, MEE Staff, MEE, 27 August 2026.
See also: Palestine Information Center, “Agent militias in Gaza: Temporary occupation tool or project to reshape society”, 3 September 2026.
https://english.palinfo.com/reports/2026/09/03/369484/
[5] “Israel/OPT: South Africa ICJ submission must spur states to press Israel to end its genocide in Gaza”, Amnesty International, 1 September 2026.
[6] Amnesty International investigation concludes Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, Amnesty International, 5 December 2024.
[7] Personal communication with Donatella Rovera, an Amnesty researcher, January 2003.
It’s OK to fight for a foreign army (as long as they’re our friends)
That’s the unwritten rule for Britain’s media
By DES FREEDMAN | Declassified UK | September 2, 2026
The death of a British national, Bradley Townsend, killed in Ukraine in June while fighting for Russian forces has been widely reported in the media.
“British traitor who joined Vladimir Putin’s army ‘killed by Ukraine drone’” splashed the Daily Star while former security minister Tom Tugendhat told LBC that Townsend was “extremely misguided” for “engaging in an army that is committing the most barbarous war crimes that the world has seen in decades.”
Compare this to the far more positive coverage in the media of individual British nationals who have served in the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) during a genocide that has killed more than 70,000 Palestinians.
When Declassified, for example, revealed exclusively that more than 2,000 British subjects had joined the IDF since October 7, the only reference to this in the mainstream media was a short article in The London Standard.
There are, however, no stories describing British nationals as ‘traitors’ for joining the IDF, nor ministerial condemnations of subjects taking part in what the United Nations has described as “war crimes” and “crimes against humanity”.
On the contrary, British subjects enlisting in the IDF are routinely humanised and their justifications reported without criticism.
A Times story in October 2023, headlined “Meet the Britons defending ‘the only place Jews feel safe’”, described IDF soldier Sam Sank as a Tottenham fan and dog owner while also referring to another dual national, Joe, as a “Chelsea fan… camping out with an emergency supply of PG Tips tea.”
BBC News interviewed British-Israeli soldier Alex Moeller on 17 November 2023 drawing on his experience in an ‘IDF anti-terror unit’.
Moeller spoke, without rebuttal, about how Israeli forces had committed to “minimise civilian casualties and obviously minimise humanitarian impact”.
He opposed a ceasefire, describing it simply as a ‘tactical’ ploy by Hamas.
There was a marked distinction in the reporting of British nationals fighting for Russia, which is extremely negative, describing them as “thugs”, “yobs” and seriously misguided people.
For example, the Sun reported in November 2024 on Jay Fraser, the “Scots mercenary fighting for Vladimir Putin” while the Observer described him as a “university dropout” who was “captivated by ‘manly’ Russia”.
In March 2024, the Mirror reported on the “British traitors” fighting on the Russian side, Ben Stimson and his best friend Aidan Minnis, describing the latter as a “former National Front member and convicted thug.”
The article quotes former British army commander Colonel Richard Kemp: “These two are an absolute disgrace and are traitors who upon their return to the UK should be arrested and jailed.”
It then carries a Home Office statement saying that: “Any person who travels from the UK to conflict zones to engage in unlawful activity, should expect to be investigated upon their return.”
There are no stories that reveal similar threats being made against dual nationals fighting for the IDF other than a single reference on late-night BBC radio on 22 July 2025.
Defence journalist Tim Ripley suggested that the UK government could use a law to stop British citizens “commuting to the war in Gaza”.
The suggestion was not explored afterwards by any outlet.
Heroes in Ukraine
In contrast to the coverage of pro-Russian Britons, articles on British subjects fighting on the side of Ukraine have been far more positive.
The Sunday Times, for example, reported sympathetically about the case of ‘Baby’, a young Scot who signed up for Ukrainian forces but who, on his return from the frontline, was prevented from joining Police Scotland.
There was also blanket coverage in February 2025 – including on the BBC and Sky – of former Tory MP Jack Lopresti who joined Ukrainian forces after losing his seat in the 2024 general election.
This includes particularly sympathetic profiles in the Telegraph and Mail. The Guardian was equally positive in its account which highlighted Foreign Office advice that “it is illegal for British citizens to fight in Ukraine”.
Even though it was revealed in February 2026 that Lopresti had joined the neo-Nazi Azov Brigade, the Telegraph then carried a story the following month with the headline: “Jack Lopresti is a rare example of a politician who puts his money where his mouth is”.
The article was written by Colonel Richard Kemp, the same person who had called for the jailing of the two Britons fighting on the Russian side.
Mark Levin Trashes the Constitution to Protect Violent West Bank Settlers
By Kurt Nimmo | Another Day in the Empire | September 8, 2026
Mark Levin is at it again. He is livid over a decision by the UK government to ban trade with violent illegal settlers in the West Bank. Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband said this week the UK will ban imports of all goods from settlements in the occupied West Bank, in addition to services including financing, construction, infrastructure, real estate, and advertising for settlements.
For Levin and the Zionists in Israel and the United States, a boycott of Kahanist settlers is antisemitism, the same as public criticism of Israel over its slaughter of Palestinians, most of whom are women and children, is hatred of Jews.
Levin considers himself a constitutional lawyer. However, his interpretation of the US Constitution is highly selective. As an ardent and outspoken Zionist and defender of apartheid and genocide, he believes a boycott of Israel is not protected by the First Amendment. The right to boycott was reaffirmed in 1982 with a Supreme Court ruling on NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co. It held that nonviolent political boycotts are a form of protected speech. However, this is irrelevant when it comes to Israel.
The case centered around a civil-rights boycott of white-owned businesses in Mississippi. The Court upheld the right to peaceful advocacy, association, and political expression that were integral to the campaign.
In 2022, the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed Arkansas’ anti-boycott contracting legislation. The majority determined that the law governed commercial purchasing choices rather than safeguarding speech. In February 2023, the Supreme Court decided not to review an appeal.
However, court rulings in Texas, Arizona, and Arkansas have upheld the right to boycott as as a protected form of political expression under the First Amendment, challenging the legality of anti-BDS laws across the United States.
“Close to 40 states across the U.S. have laws that require ending contracts with and/or divesting from companies that engage in antisemitic boycotts, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) against Israel,” Levin posted to social media on September 7.
These states whose combined GDP is significant should publicly make clear to countries such as the UK that companies that engage in BDS because of their decisions will face consequences under state anti-BDS laws. By the way, Florida and Texas combined have a much larger GDP than the UK.
The Boycott, Divestment, and Sanction (BDS) movement is now illegal in 38 states. Congress has also considered anti-boycott legislation. In 2019, the Senate passed S.1, which contains anti-boycott provisions. In 2023, Republicans, including Marco Rubio, reintroduced the Combating BDS Act.
Most Americans oppose anti-BDS laws by a wide margin. 72% oppose laws penalizing people who boycott Israel while 22% supported such laws, according to the University of Maryland’s Critical Issues Poll.
Levin is not opposed to BDS if it focuses on the correct target. In 2021, for instance, he demanded a BDS-style boycott of big tech and major television networks in response to criticism of Israel. “He argues that the way to fight against distortions and false claims, and to counter the media censors, is take a page from the anti-Israel activists’ playbook,” reported the Jerusalem News Syndicate in 2021.
Does Levin disagree with the colonial protests against British goods in the 1760s and 1770s that led to the Boston Tea Party? Does he believe the Montgomery bus boycott in the mid-1950s was illegitimate? How about the United Farm Workers boycotts in the 1960s, or the NAACP Mississippi boycott of white-owned businesses, also in the 60s?
No, probably not. The only legitimate opposition to BDS concerns Israel. The Zionist state gets a pass and the Constitution is null and void when confronted with spurious accusations of antisemitism.
Buck-Dancing for Zion: Hakeem Jeffries
How Brooklyn’s point man in Congress was groomed to serve Jewish interests over his own constituents

José Niño Unfiltered | September 7, 2026
Jared Kushner and Hakeem Jeffries met privately in New York City in recent weeks, and neither man wanted to discuss it afterward.
The New York Times reported the encounter on August 23, citing five people with knowledge of a session held in a New York City space a mutual friend provided. The two men discussed housing, immigration, and the cost of living. Kushner urged Jeffries to sit down with White House chief of staff Susie Wiles as a follow-up. NBC News confirmed the account the same day. Jeffries’s initial statement never acknowledged the meeting at all, insisting only that “the affordability crisis is not a hoax and nothing short of transformational policy change is acceptable.” He later posted a video on X acknowledging that “Kushner asked for a meeting.”
The timing carried its own message. Democrats lead in nearly every midterm poll, and Jeffries becomes speaker if they capture the House in November. Kushner has told associates that Jeffries ranks as “the most serious” Democratic leader. House Speaker Mike Johnson shrugged at the news on Fox News, saying “I don’t know what that’s about.” Crooked Media co-founder Tommy Vietor was less charitable, posting on X: “Jared Kushner has no actual government job; he just uses his family connections to get money from gulf autocrats and fund corrupt deals. The only way Jeffries should work with him is with demands for documents and subpoenas.”
That reaction captures a long-standing problem with Jeffries. Namely, the qualities that make Jeffries someone Trump’s inner circle can work with are the same qualities that have made him a target inside his own party and nowhere is more apparent than on the issue of Israel.
Jeffries reached that position by a steady ascent through the House. He won New York’s 8th Congressional District in 2012, succeeding Ed Towns, and quickly built a legislative profile around criminal justice reform. He introduced legislation to criminalize chokeholds after Eric Garner’s death and served as the lead Democratic sponsor of the bipartisan First Step Act of 2018, a jailbreak bill that became one of Donald Trump’s most significant legislative accomplishments of his first term.
House Democrats unanimously elected Jeffries to succeed Nancy Pelosi as House minority leader on November 30, 2022, making him the first Black American to lead either party in either chamber of Congress. He was re-elected to the post in 2024. In July 2025 he set the record for the longest House floor speech in modern history, speaking for eight hours and 44 minutes against the One Big Beautiful Bill Act and breaking the mark Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) set in 2021. Heading into the 2026 midterms, Jeffries is widely positioned to become speaker if Democrats retake the House.
With Jeffries potentially becoming House Speaker, American Jewry could breathe a sigh of relief knowing that they have a safe pair of hands wielding the speaker’s gavel. Jeffries represents Brooklyn’s 8th District, which Jewish Currents has described as the 15th most Jewish congressional district in the country, and he was raised in Crown Heights, home to the global headquarters of the Chabad-Lubavitch movement. He has extolled that constituency, telling reporters and audiences that “in New York City we consider Jerusalem to be the sixth borough.”
His public language and, more importantly, his legislative record on Israel have been reliably pro-Zionist throughout his congressional career. Jeffries backed the $1 billion Iron Dome replenishment in September 2021, which passed 420 to 9 over objections from eight progressive Democrats. He voted in favor of the $26.4 billion Israel Security Supplemental, H.R. 8034, in April 2024, which split House Democrats 173 to 37. He voted no on a GOP standalone Israel aid bill, H.R. 6126, in February 2024 that Democrats viewed as a partisan maneuver, and he supported the 2019 anti-BDS resolution H.Res.246 as well as the Antisemitism Awareness Act in May 2024. By 2022 alone, Jewish Currents documented Jeffries raising $440,000 from Israel-advocacy groups—the sixth-highest total among House members that cycle, per OpenSecrets—and he has traveled to Israel five times on AIPAC-sponsored trips since entering Congress in 2013. Jeffrie’s pro-Israel funding surged to over $1 million by the 2024 election cycle.
In July 2026, Jeffries continued his pro-Israel antics. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) offered an amendment stripping $3.3 billion in Foreign Military Financing for Israel from the fiscal 2027 State Department bill. It failed 104 to 314. Among Democrats, 103 voted yes, 98 voted no, and 10 voted present, with Massie the lone Republican supporter. Jeffries voted no. In a Dear Colleague letter, he called the measure “overly broad,” arguing it would hinder humanitarian aid efforts, refugee resettlement, and efforts to undermine resistance groups like Hamas. Notably, he declined to whip the vote, telling members there would be “good faith reasons that will result in members voting in a variety of different ways.”
They would proceed to do so, with his own deputy, Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-MA), announcing she would vote yes because “the status quo is not tenable.” Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi voted yes as well, saying “the Netanyahu government cannot maintain its current course.” Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar (D-CA) stayed with Jeffries. The party’s top two leaders had split publicly on the defining foreign policy question of the cycle, and Jeffries found himself on the shrinking side.
The money surrounding that vote drew immediate scrutiny. Sludge reported that on May 20, AIPAC’s PAC routed two earmarked payments totaling $149,300 to the Jeffries Battleground Protection Fund, the largest earmarked disbursement in the PAC’s history, listed in Federal Election Commission records as an earmark of Jewish billionaire investor Daniel Och.
The AIPAC money flowing into Jeffries’ coffers has raised concerns among progressives. When Jeffries told WNYC’s Brian Lehrer Show in November 2025 that AIPAC’s PAC could give only “$5,000 or $10,000 per cycle, that’s it,” Sludge called the characterization misleading, noting the group’s conduit system has funneled more than a million dollars in earmarked donations to his campaigns.
That financial relationship has fueled further backlash. When AIPAC’s United Democracy Project super PAC spent $14.5 million in June 2024 to defeat Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY), Jeffries offered only a muted response, telling Punchbowl News that “pro-Israel groups are going to support pro-Israel members of Congress.” Radio host Charlamagne tha God has mockingly nicknamed Jeffries “AIPAC Shakur” for his close alignment with pro-Israel donors.
Other leftist outlets have taken Jeffries to task for his devotion to Israeli interests. His 2026 partnership with liberal Zionist organization J Street to oppose the Massie-sponsored arms amendment drew a pointed critique from CounterPunch, which accused him of coupling rhetoric about restraint with continued support for weapons transfers amid allegations of Israeli conduct in Gaza.
Jeffries’s financial entanglements do not end with AIPAC. Sam Bankman-Fried, the FTX founder later convicted of fraud, donated to Jeffries’s campaign, and Jeffries pledged to donate the funds after FTX’s collapse, according to Bloomberg. Separately, 2026 reporting found that committees tied to Jeffries and other Democratic leaders donated to candidates who had pledged to reject corporate PAC money, even as those same committees accepted funds from corporations including Barclays, CVS and UnitedHealthcare, raising accusations of an indirect funding workaround.
The financial ties only reinforce a rhetorical record that consistently delegitimized Palestinian resistance to Israeli transgressions. In February 2022, he called claims that Israel is an apartheid state “demonstrably false, dangerous and designed to isolate Israel in one of the toughest neighborhoods in the world,” responding directly to Amnesty International’s report on Israeli apartheid. After October 7, 2023, he declared in a press release that “America stands firmly and unequivocally with Israel” and that Congress “must stand with Israel until the invasion by Hamas has been crushed.” He also criticized the phrase “from the river to the sea” in a November 2023 statement as a call for “the complete destruction of Israel,” and stressed in February 2025 that “our commitment to Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish and Democratic state and eternal homeland for the Jewish people is ironclad.”
The most recent flashpoint in Jeffries’s career came in August 2026 with a private meeting with Jared Kushner, President Trump’s son-in-law and top outside adviser, to discuss “potential areas of common ground” on housing, immigration, and the cost of living. The New York Times noted the meeting’s timing “underscored that those around Mr. Trump were well aware of the likelihood of a Democratic-led House,” and that Kushner suggested Jeffries also meet with White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles. Kushner reportedly told associates that if anything bipartisan gets done with Congress, Jeffries is “the most serious person among Democratic leaders.”
Despite the criticism he received from progressives, Jeffries defended the meeting on CNN and in a video posted to X, insisting “no one from the Trump cartel is getting a pass” and that he agreed to the sit-down only to “discuss the affordability crisis that exists, that is not a hoax.” This was not the first time Jeffries and Kushner had found common ground. He and Kushner have a prior working relationship dating to their collaboration on the 2018 First Step Act.
Taken together, Hakeem Jeffries is a reliable servant of Israel and the broader Jewish community. Both Trump terms have been Judeo-accelerationist to the core, with Israel getting nearly everything it wants. Naturally, the American public has grown tired of these escapades that only advance Jewish interests and are now prepared to vote the bums out in the upcoming midterms.
Though it should be stressed that in the Jewish-dominated plutocracy we live in there is no meaningful opposition to the Pan-Judah. At best, voters will have to pull the lever for another competing faction of Jewish proxies.
Enter Hakeem Jeffries and his minions.
Regardless of how the political pendulum swings later this year, the Jewish donor networks and political action committees backing Israel face no real downside, secure in the knowledge that a Democratic flip merely elevates Jeffries, an empty suit who is a certified coon for the Cohens in word and in deed.
Israel’s Rafael to produce missile parts at Volkswagen factory in Germany
The Cradle | September 7, 2026
Rafael Advanced Defense Systems plans to begin manufacturing parts for Israel’s Iron Dome missile systems at the Volkswagen factory in Osnabrueck, Germany, WirtschaftsWoche reported on 7 September.
According to the German business magazine, Volkswagen will sell the plant to a consortium which will include the German federal state of Lower Saxony and a Bavarian investment fund.
Volkswagen is streamlining its operations in Germany as industrial production in the country slows following the loss of cheap Russian natural gas after the start of the Russia–Ukraine war and the destruction of the Nord Stream Pipeline in 2022.
The German automaker will also close four factories, laying off up to 50,000 employees.
Olef Lies, minister-president of Lower Saxony, participated in the negotiations and will announce the new partnership on Monday.
The Financial Times (FT) first reported in March that Volkswagen and Rafael were in talks to shift production at the Osnabrueck plant from cars to missile components.
Rafael had planned to build missile parts and motors, rather than explosives, which would be manufactured at a separate facility, the sources speaking with FT said.
A deal between Volkswagen and Rafael for the sale of the plant was reached in April.
However, it was blocked by the Qatar Investment Authority (QIA), which holds 10 percent of Volkswagen shares and 17 percent of its voting rights.
To bypass Qatari opposition, Lower Saxony was brought in to help purchase the factory alongside Rafael and Aurelius Capital, a Munich-based investment fund.
The Osnabrueck plant currently employs 2,300 employees. It is unclear whether employees will retain their jobs or what employment protections they will receive.
Volkswagen reportedly plans to sign a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with Aurelius Capital to protect workers’ rights at the factory.
The Iron Dome, Arrow, and David’s Sling missile defense systems have helped Israel wage the genocide in Gaza and wars on Lebanon, Iran, and Yemen by shielding Israel from retaliatory missile and drone attacks.
A shift from automobile to missile production would mark Germany’s renewed focus on manufacturing weapons amid the ongoing wars between the US and Iran, and Ukraine and Russia.
Germany and NATO are strong supporters of Ukraine and say they are preparing for a direct conflict with Russia in the coming years.
Support for Israel’s security is at the core of Berlin’s foreign policy, German leaders have stated, citing as justification the country’s Nazi past.
Der Spiegel revealed last week that despite the genocide in Gaza, Berlin has approved nearly $930 million in military equipment exports to Israel during the first half of this year alone.
Eight Arab and Muslim states reject Israeli displacement plans for Gaza
Palestinian Information Center – September 6, 2026
GAZA – Eight Arab and Muslim countries have condemned remarks by far-right Israeli ministers Itamar Ben Gvir and Israel Katz on plans to forcibly displace Palestinians from the Gaza Strip.
The foreign ministers of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Indonesia, Pakistan, Türkiye and Qatar said in a joint statement released on Sunday that such Israeli plans violate international and humanitarian law and pose a direct threat to the Palestinian people’s legitimate and inalienable rights.
The ministers voiced rejection of any Israeli attempt to displace Palestinians from or within the occupied territory, warning against transforming extremist rhetoric on forced displacement into official state policy.
The ministers warned that the displacement of Gazans would destabilize the region and derail global peace efforts, undermining US president Donald Trump’s plan to end the Gaza war, which clearly rejects forced population transfers.
The ministers stressed that Gaza is an integral part of the occupied Palestinian territories, calling for preserving the unity of Gaza, the West Bank and east Jerusalem.
They reiterated their countries’ support for a two-state solution establishing an independent Palestinian state along the June 4, 1967 lines, with east Jerusalem as its capital.
They urged the international community and UN Security Council to oppose Israeli attempts to impose a new demographic or geographic reality in the occupied Palestinian territories.











