Israel kills more Palestinian journalists in Gaza
Press TV – June 30, 2025
Israel continues to target Palestinian journalists covering the regime’s atrocities in Gaza, killing a number of them in Gaza City.
“Several Palestinian journalists were killed and others injured in an Israeli airstrike targeting al-Baqa Café in western Gaza City, where they had been working to upload news reports,” Rami Abdu, the founder of Chairman of Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor, said in a tweet on Monday.
Medical sources said at least 33 people were killed and dozens of others injured in the attack.
Most of the victims were “journalists, artists, and social media activists”, as the place is one of the few remaining internet access points in the strip,” Abdu added, amid internet blackout.
“It’s increasingly clear that Israel is deliberately targeting data upload hubs used by journalists to transmit reports and images.”
Among the victims was Ismail Abu Hatab, a photojournalist who worked with several media platforms and various outlets, Gaza’s Government Media Office said on Telegram.
The office “condemned in the strongest terms the systematic targeting, killing, and assassination of Palestinian journalists by the Israeli occupation”.
Since this morning, hospital sources said at least 80 people have been killed in Israeli strikes on Gaza.
Sources told Al-Jazeera that those killed include 57 Palestinians in northern Gaza, and 15 aid seekers near the so-called aid distribution centers north of the southern city of Rafah.
Israel launched the campaign of genocide in Gaza on October 7, 2023. It has killed over 56,530 Palestinians there so far, according to the health ministry of Gaza.
UK arrests 4 in crackdown on Palestine Action over RAF incursion
Al Mayadeen | June 28, 2025
UK counterterrorism authorities have arrested four individuals in connection with a break-in at RAF Brize Norton, reportedly carried out by members of Palestine Action. The incident, which took place last Friday, involved activists entering the Royal Air Force base in Oxfordshire and spray painting on two military aircraft in protest against Britain’s support for “Israel” and its ongoing genocide in Gaza.
South East Counter Terrorism Police confirmed the arrests, stating that a 29-year-old woman without a fixed address, along with two men aged 36 and 24, were detained on “terrorism-related grounds”. A fourth suspect, a 41-year-old woman, was arrested on suspicion of “assisting an offender.”
Authorities said the three were being held under suspicion of committing, preparing, or instigating acts of terrorism, as defined under Section 41 of the Terrorism Act 2000.
Government crackdown on pro-Palestine activism
Following the arrests, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper announced her intention to designate Palestine Action as a proscribed organization under the UK’s Terrorism Act. If implemented, the designation would make it illegal to support, join, or promote the group, an escalation that has drawn concern from human rights advocates and civil liberties organizations.
On the same day, hundreds gathered in Trafalgar Square to express solidarity with the group, warning against the criminalization of activism aimed at opposing the UK’s complicity in supplying weapons to “Israel”.
In response, Palestine Action issued a statement via X, condemning the government’s treatment of the protest. “Despite us not being proscribed, the state is treating red paint on warplanes as an act of terrorism,” the group stated. It further revealed that the arrested activists were being held in solitary confinement without charge for several days.
Authorities moved quickly to suppress related demonstrations, dispersing planned rallies outside Parliament and pushing protesters into Trafalgar Square. Several arrests were made, with the Metropolitan Police citing public order risks. Meanwhile, counter-terrorism police have launched a broader security review across UK military installations.
Wider context
Palestine Action, founded in 2020 by British-Palestinian activist Huda Ammori and co-founder Richard Barnard, is known for its confrontational yet non-lethal tactics aimed at arms companies tied to “Israel’s” military-industrial complex. Previous campaigns have led to the temporary shutdown of Elbit Systems-linked factories in Oldham and Tamworth, as well as disrupted contracts with Israeli weapons suppliers.
Legal experts have raised doubts about whether Palestine Action meets the statutory requirements for proscription under the Terrorism Act 2000, which include posing a real threat to national security or British citizens. Critics argue that the group’s actions, while disruptive, remain rooted in civil disobedience rather than terrorism.
The proposed ban has renewed scrutiny of UK-“Israel” cooperation, with campaigners pointing to past evidence of coordination between British counterterrorism units and the Israeli embassy. Concerns are growing that this measure could set a precedent for further repression of pro-Palestine activism.
Families of detained activists face deepening uncertainty, as support efforts, ranging from legal aid to court appearances, could be criminalized. Foreign nationals involved in the group may also face deportation or visa revocation if the ban is enacted.
Danish shipping giant Maersk divests from firms linked to Israeli settlements
Press TV – June 25, 2025
Shipping giant Maersk has announced that it will sever business ties with companies linked to the Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, citing concerns over complicity in Israel’s genocidal crimes against the Palestinians.
The Danish firm said in a statement on its official website Wednesday that it has tightened its vetting process “in relation to Israeli settlements.”
“Following a recent review of transports related to the West Bank, we further strengthened our screening procedures in relation to Israeli settlements,” read the statement.
It said the company’s decision “addresses only shipments to/from settlements” and is “not about cutting ties with the companies on the OHCHR (the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights) list in general but only related to transport to/from Israeli settlements.”
Maersk has not specified the exact businesses or contracts affected, but the OHCHR database includes businesses involved in various activities related to the settlements, such as providing services, equipment, or financial operations.
The firm’s decision follows a months-long campaign led by the Palestinian Youth Movement (PYM), which accused it of playing a role in Israel’s military supply chain — including the shipment of weapons components.
Weeks earlier, Maersk shareholders voted at the company’s annual general meeting to review the firm’s involvement in arms shipments to the occupied Palestinian territories.
The Palestinian group welcomed the decision, which it said is a “step toward dismantling complicity in occupation and apartheid.”
“This sends a clear message to the global shipping industry: compliance with international law and basic human rights is not optional. Doing business with Israel’s illegal settlements is no longer viable, and the world is watching to see who follows next,” said PYM’s spokeswoman Aisha Nizar.
She called for further action though, arguing that Maersk still transports goods for the Israeli military, including components of its F-35 warplanes.
“Maersk continues to profit from the genocide of our people – regularly shipping F-35 components used to bomb and massacre Palestinians.”
Nizar said the campaign “will continue to build pressure and mobilize people power until Maersk cuts all ties to genocide and ends the transport of weapons and weapons components to Israel.”
In 2024, Spain banned Maersk ships transporting military goods to Israel from using its ports.
The PYM revealed earlier in June how the Danish firm was using the port of Rotterdam as an essential link in, as it said, a “supply chain of death.”
In response to those findings, Maersk has previously said it upholds a strict policy of not shipping weapons or ammunition to active conflict zones.
The PYM urged other logistics and shipping firms to follow suit and cut ties with companies complicit is Israel’s war crimes in the occupied Palestinian territories.
Gaza death toll reaches 84,000 far higher than official counts, new study finds
MEMO | June 25, 2025
A new study has found that at least 75,200 Palestinians were killed in Gaza between October 2023 and January 2025 as a direct result of Israel’s military campaign. This figure is almost 40 per cent higher than the death toll reported by the Gaza Ministry of Health (GMoH) for the same period, which stood at approximately 45,650.
The study, Violent and Nonviolent Death Tolls for the Gaza War: New Primary Evidence, present the results from a large-scale household survey the Gaza Mortality Survey (GMS). It is the most comprehensive and scientifically grounded estimate of war-related deaths in the enclave to date. It also estimates 8,540 excess nonviolent deaths, due to starvation, disease, and the collapse of healthcare systems, bringing the combined toll of the war to nearly 84,000 lives lost.
The research was conducted by an international team of scholars: Michael Spagat (Royal Holloway, University of London), Jon Pedersen (independent), Khalil Shikaki (Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research), Michael Robbins (Princeton University), Eran Bendavid (Stanford University), Håvard Hegre (Peace Research Institute Oslo), and Debarati Guha-Sapir (Université Catholique de Louvain).
Based on face-to-face interviews, the study randomly selected 2,000 households across Gaza, representing a population sample of 9,729 individuals. Data were gathered between 30 December 2024 and 5 January 2025, under conditions of extreme violence, displacement, and siege. The Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research led the fieldwork.
The survey found that 56.2 per cent of violent deaths were among women, children and the elderly, figures that align closely with GMoH reports and counter claims that the ministry has inflated civilian casualties.
By contrast, the study found the GMoH likely undercounted total fatalities, with the official figure falling below even the lower bound of the study’s 95 per cent confidence interval. In absolute terms, the bottom estimate of 63,600 is still more than 17,000 above the GMoH total.
The researchers took additional steps to mitigate bias and account for the massive displacement of Gaza’s population, including statistical raking to match expected demographic distributions and using mobile tracking and live data uploads for verification. The survey also corrected for under-sampled areas like Northern Gaza and Rafah.
Nonviolent deaths, largely from disease, hunger, and denial of medical care, are often overlooked in conflict tolls, but the GMS sets a precedent by offering a grounded estimate. The study calculated that 8,540 of these were “excess” deaths—deaths that would not have occurred under peacetime conditions. Infants were particularly affected: among 357 children born after the war began, four died, indicating extreme neonatal vulnerability.
The authors say their results contradict narratives that cast doubt on Palestinian casualty reports. They found no evidence to support allegations that GMoH has exaggerated figures, and instead concluded that the ministry’s records are conservative. Furthermore, the demographic profile of the dead—mostly civilians—supports broader human rights findings that Israel’s war in Gaza has disproportionately targeted non-combatants.
This study comes as Israel faces a genocide investigation at the International Court of Justice and mounting scrutiny over its conduct in Gaza. The authors say their work lays the foundation for accurate historical reckoning and accountability.
Yemeni defence minister affirms maritime blockade of Israel to continue
MEMO | June 25, 2025
Advisor to the director of the Moral Guidance Department at the Yemeni Ministry of Defence, Brigadier General Abed Thawr stressed Tuesday that the maritime blockade imposed by the Houthis on Israeli and Israel-bound ships will continue, adding that the recent conflict between Iran and Israel and the subsequent ceasefire, will not affect the group’s support for the Palestinian cause.
“Gaza will remain our cause and our common destiny” he told Al-Resalah Net.
“From 7 October 2023, until now, Yemen has not stopped supporting Gaza politically, militarily, and popularly, because Palestine lives in our hearts, and the battle of Gaza is the battle of all free people,” he added. Thawr stressed that Yemen, under the leadership of its armed forces and revolutionary leadership, will continue to impose a naval and air blockade on the “Zionist entity” and will not allow any ship to pass into the occupied ports, regardless of its nationality or destination.
“The enemy has ignored humanitarian demands for the entry of food and medicine and the opening of the crossings, and therefore the Yemeni response will continue with our missiles and drones”.
Thawr explained that the weekly mass demonstrations in Yemen since the start of the aggression on Gaza in October 2023, are a clear manifestation of the depth of popular affiliation with the Palestinian cause.
“The people of Gaza are our people, their honour is our honour, and we will harness all our military and economic capabilities to support them until their suffering is alleviated and what the occupation has destroyed is rebuilt”.
He also criticised “shameful and humiliating” official Arab positions, stressing that the Yemeni people will not wait for action from subservient governments but will continue to stand with Gaza until its liberation.
“As long as Yemen exists, rest assured that Israel and America will remain besieged in the Red Sea, and that Gaza will never be left alone. Victory is near, God willing, and we will remain faithful to the covenant until the end,” he concluded.
Meet the Israeli fanatic running Ted Cruz’s office

By Wyatt Reed | The Grayzone | June 23, 2025
On June 18, former Fox host Tucker Carlson published a video which, though marketed as an interview, was more of a snuff film. Over the course of two hours, Carlson can be seen rhetorically disemboweling his debate opponent, US Senator Ted Cruz, on the politician’s determination to see the US attack Iran on Israel’s behalf.
While Cruz presents himself as a Christian Zionist moved by his own zealotry to support Israel, the politician’s Tel Aviv-driven policy line can also be traced back to his Senior Advisor for Policy and Communications, an Israeli-born Zionist lobbyist named Omri Ceren.
Before overseeing Cruz’s public relations, Ceren managed his foreign policy docket as his national security advisor. Prior to joining the Senator’s staff, Ceren served as the press director for The Israel Project, a Zionist pressure group which was forced to close down after being exposed as a de facto Israeli government front by Al Jazeera’s groundbreaking undercover investigation, The Lobby. Before that, Ceren cut his teeth lobbying for Ivory Coast dictator Laurent Gbagbo, who relied on Ceren as a registered foreign agent lending his marketing expertise to the embattled regime.
Ceren has consistently opposed a nuclear deal with Iran since at least 2015, when he declared that any agreement would simply ensure Tehran was “able to cheat with impunity.” At a talk hosted by the neocon Hudson Institute think tank in 2018, he suggested Washington should continue preaching about “freedom” and encouraging Iranian protesters to pursue regime change while simultaneously maintaining Trump’s ban on Iranians entering the US.
Omri’s sister, Merav Ceren, previously worked under the supervision of the Israeli Defense Ministry, as well as another Israeli government cutout in Washington, the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. The pair were born in Haifa, Israel, with Merav embarking on her career of Israel lobbying as a college student.
Upon Merav Ceren’s appointment to head the Israel and Iran desks of Trump’s National Security Council in April 2025, one Israeli publication declared her “One of Our Own.” The authors went on to boast that Ceren’s “presence… in the discussion rooms gives significant space to voice Israeli interests.” Just a month later, however, she was fired as tensions between the Republican Party’s America First and Israel First wings came to a head.
While his sister looked for a new gig, Omri Ceren continued to represent his home country as the national security advisor to a senator who has pantomimed “America First” conservatism while zealously advancing Israel’s objectives. Cruz’s messaging since the US bombed Iran’s nuclear facilities on June 21 clearly bears his Israeli advisor’s imprimatur.
Since the attack, Cruz has posted 14 comments on Twitter/X. 12 of them consisted of breathless statements cheering the bombing or attacks on opponents of the war, whom he branded as “the death to America crowd.” The remaining two posts expressed affection for the senator’s hometown NBA team, the Houston Rockets.
Why BBC editors must one day stand trial for colluding in Israel’s genocide
Journalist Peter Oborne sets out six ways the state broadcaster has wilfully misled audiences on Israel’s destruction of Gaza
By Jonathan Cook | June 20, 2025
Veteran journalist Peter Oborne eviscerated the BBC this week over its shameful reporting of Gaza – and unusually, he managed to do so face-to-face with the BBC’s executive news editor, Richard Burgess, during a parliamentary meeting.
Oborne’s remarks relate to a new and damning report by the Centre for Media Monitoring, which analysed in detail the BBC’s Gaza coverage in the year following Hamas’ one-day attack on 7 October 2023. The report found a “pattern of bias, double standards and silencing of Palestinian voices.” These aren’t editorial slip-ups. They reveal a systematic, long-term skewing of editorial coverage in Israel’s favour.
Oborne was one of several journalists to confront Burgess.
Oborne makes a series of important points that illustrate why the BBC’s slanted, Israel-friendly news agenda amounts to genocide denial, and means executives like Burgess are directly complicit in Israeli war crimes:
1. The BBC has never mentioned the Hannibal directive, invoked by Israel on 7 October 2023, that green-lit the murder of Israeli soldiers and civilians, often by Apache helicopter fire, to prevent them being taken captive by Hamas. The Israeli media has extensively reported on the role of the Hannibal directive in the Israeli military’s response on 7 October, but that coverage has been completely ignored by the BBC and most UK media outlets.
Israel’s invocation of the Hannibal directive – essential context for understanding what happened on 7 October – explains much of the destruction that day in Israel usually attributed to Hamas “barbarism”, such as the graveyard of burnt-out, crumpled cars and the charred, crumbling remains of houses in communities near Gaza.
Hamas, with its light weapons, did not have the ability to inflict this kind of damage on Israel, and we know from Israeli witnesses, video footage and admissions from Israeli military officers that Israel was responsible for at least a share of the carnage that day. How much we will apparently never know because Israel is not willing to investigate itself, and media like the BBC are not doing any investigations themselves, or putting any pressure on Israel to do so.
2. The BBC has never mentioned Israel’s Dahiya doctrine, the basis of its “mowing the lawn” approach to Gaza over the past two decades, in which the Israeli military has intermittently destroyed large swaths of the tiny enclave. The official aim has been to push the population, in the words of Israeli generals, back to the “Stone Age”. The assumption is that, forced into survival mode, Palestinians will not have the energy or will to resist their brutal and illegal subjugation by Israel and that it will be easier for Israel to ethnically cleanse them from their homeland.
Because Israel has been implementing this military doctrine – a form of collective punishment and therefore indisputably a war crime – for at least 20 years, it is critically important in any analysis of the events that led up to 7 October, or of the genocidal campaign of destruction Israel launched subsequently.
The BBC’s refusal even to acknowledge the doctrine’s existence leaves audiences gravely misinformed about Israel’s historical abuses of Gaza, and deprived of context to interpret the campaign of destruction by Israel over the past 20 months.
3. The BBC has utterly failed to report the many dozens of genocidal statements from Israeli officials since 7 October – again vital context for audiences to understand Israel’s goals in Gaza.
Perhaps most egregiously, the BBC has not reported Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s biblically-inspired comparison of the Palestinians to “Amalek” – a people the Jews were instructed by God to wipe from the face of the earth. Netanyahu knew this clearly genocidal statement would have especial resonance with what now amounts to a majority of the combat soldiers in Gaza who belong to extreme religious communities that view the Bible as the literal truth.
The hardest thing to prove in genocide is intent. And yet the reason Israel’s violence in Gaza is so clearly genocidal is that every senior official from the prime minister down has repeatedly told us that genocide is their intent. The decision not to inform audiences of these public statements is not journalism. It is pro-Israel disinformation and genocide denial.
4. By contrast, as Oborne notes, on more than 100 occasions when guests have tried to refer to what is happening in Gaza as a genocide, BBC staff have immediately shut them down on air. As other investigations have shown, the BBC has strictly enforced a policy not only of banning the use of the term “genocide” by its own journalists in reference to Gaza but of depriving others – from Palestinians to western medical volunteers and international law experts – of the right to use the term as well. Again, this is pure genocide denial.
5. Oborne also points to the fact that the BBC has largely ignored Israel’s campaign of murdering Palestinian journalists in Gaza. A greater number have been killed by Israel in its war on the tiny enclave than the total number of journalists killed in all other major conflicts of the past 160 years combined.
The BBC has reported just 6 per cent of the more than 225 journalists killed by Israel in Gaza, compared to 62 per cent of the far smaller number of journalists killed in Ukraine. This is once again vital context for understanding that Israel’s goals are genocidal. It hopes to exterminate the main witnesses to its crimes.
6. Oborne adds a point of his own. He notes that the distinguished Israeli historian Avi Shlaim lives in the UK and teaches at Oxford University. Unlike the Israeli spokespeople familiar to BBC audiences, who are paid to muddy the waters and deny Israel’s genocide, Shlaim is both knowledgeable about the history of Israeli colonisation of Palestine and truly independent. He is in a position to dispassionately provide the context BBC audiences need to make judgments about what is going on and who is responsible for it.
And yet extraordinarily, Shlaim has never been invited on by the BBC. He is only too ready to do interviews. He has done them for Al Jazeera, for example. But he isn’t invited on because, it seems, he is “the wrong sort of Jew”. His research has led him to a series of highly critical conclusions about Israel’s historical and current treatment of the Palestinians. He calls what Israel is doing in Gaza a genocide. He is one of the prominent Israelis we are never allowed to hear from, because they are likely to make more credible and mainstream a narrative the BBC wishes to present as fringe, loopy and antisemitic. Again, what the BBC is doing – paid for by British taxpayers – isn’t journalism. It is propaganda for a foreign state.
Burgess’ answer is a long-winded shrugging of the shoulders, a BBC executive’s way of acting clueless – an equivalent of Manuel, the dim-witted Spanish waiter in the classic comedy show Fawlty Towers, saying: “I know nothing.”
Other lowlights from Burgess include his responding to a pointed question from Declassified journalist Hamza Yusuf on why the BBC has not given attention to British spy planes operating over Gaza from RAF base Akrotiri on Cyprus. “I don’t think we should overplay the UK’s contribution to what’s happening in Israel,” Burgess answers.
So the British state broadcaster has decided that its duty is not to investigate the nature of British state assistance to Israel in Gaza, even though most experts agree what Israel is doing there amounts to genocide. Burgess thinks scrutiny of British state complicity would be “overplaying” British collusion, even though the BBC has not actually investigated the extent or nature of that collusion to have reached a conclusion. This is the very antithesis of what journalism is there to do: monitor the centres of power, not exonerate such power-centres before they have even been scrutinised.
Labour MP Andy McDonald responded to Burgess: “To underplay the role of the UK is an error.”
It is more than that. It is journalistic complicity in British and Israeli state war crimes.
Here are a few key statistical findings from the Centre for Media Monitoring’s report on BBC coverage of Gaza over the year following 7 October 2023:
- The BBC ran more than 30 times more victim profiles of Israelis than Palestinians.
- The BBC interviewed more than twice as many Israelis as Palestinians.
- The BBC asked 38 of its guests to condemn Hamas. It asked no one to condemn Israel’s mass killing of civilians, or its attacks on hospitals and schools.
- Only 0.5% of BBC articles mentioned Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestine.The BBC mentioned “occupation” – the essential context for understanding the relationship between Israel and Palestinians – only 14 times in news articles when providing context to the events of 7 October 2023. That amounted to 0.3% of articles. Additional context – decades of Israeli apartheid rule and Israel’s 17-year blockade of Gaza — were entirely missing from the coverage.
- The BBC described Israeli captives as “hostages”, while Palestinian detainees, including children held without charge, were called “prisoners”. During one major hostage exchange in which 90 Palestinians were swapped for three Israelis, 70% of BBC articles focused on those three Israelis.
- The BBC covered Ukraine with twice as many articles as Gaza in the time period, even though the Gaza story was newer and Israeli crimes even graver than Russia ones. The corporation was twice as likely to use sympathetic language for Ukrainian victims than it was for Palestinian victims.
- In coverage, Palestinians were usually described as having “died” or been “killed” in air strikes, without mention of who launched those strikes. Israeli victims, on the other hand, were “massacred”, “slaughtered” and “butchered” – and the author of the violence was named, even though, as we have seen, the Hannibal directive clouded the picture in at least some of those cases.
As is only too evident watching Burgess respond, he is not there to learn from the state broadcaster’s glaring mistakes – because systematic BBC pro-Israel bias isn’t a mistake. It’s precisely what the BBC is there to do.
UK seeks to ban Palestine Action over RAF base protest
Al Mayadeen | June 21, 2025
British news outlets on Saturday revealed that the UK government is preparing to ban Palestine Action, a pro-Palestinian direct action group, by classifying it as a terrorist organization. This move, spearheaded by Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, is expected to be announced in a ministerial statement on Monday and will require parliamentary approval. If enacted, the ban would criminalize membership and support for the group under the Terrorism Act 2000.
The proposed proscription follows a high-profile protest at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire, where Palestine Action activists gained access to the military airbase and sprayed red paint on two aircraft. The group described the action as part of a campaign to disrupt the UK’s complicity in “Israel’s” assault on Gaza. “Activists have interrupted Britain’s direct participation in the commission of genocide and war crimes across the Middle East,” the group said.
Video footage released by the group showed two individuals entering the base at night on electric scooters, with one spraying red paint into the engine of a Voyager aircraft, used to transport British leaders and refuel allied jets. A spokesperson for the group declared: “Despite publicly condemning the Israeli government, Britain continues to send military cargo, fly spy planes over Gaza and refuel US and Israeli fighter jets.”
Though the RAF claimed the damage is being assessed and does not expect major operational disruptions, the incident has sparked a wider security review across UK military bases. The government’s response has drawn criticism for targeting activism rather than addressing its own military entanglements.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer condemned the protest as “disgraceful” and labeled it “an act of vandalism,” while counter-terrorism police and the Ministry of Defence continue their investigations.
Disruptive Solidarity
Founded in 2020 by Huda Ammori, a British-Palestinian activist, and Richard Barnard, Palestine Action is known for its non-violent yet disruptive tactics aimed at corporations that profit from the Israeli military-industrial complex.
The group has previously shut down two Elbit Systems-linked arms factories in Oldham and Tamworth and forced companies like Dean Group International to cut contracts with Israeli weapons manufacturers. Their disruptive tactics—ranging from factory occupations and sabotage to sustained divestment pressure, have challenged British institutions to reckon with their role in supplying the machinery of occupation.
Friday’s action at Brize Norton marks one of the group’s most significant actions yet, directly confronting a military base central to the UK’s support operations.
Critics say the proscription is a politically motivated attempt to silence dissent against Britain’s role in arming and supporting “Israel”. “We represent every person who stands for Palestinian liberation. If they want to ban us, they ban us all,” Palestine Action posted on X. The Palestine Solidarity Campaign called the move “outrageous,” defending the group as a non-violent direct action network.
The planned ban raises serious concerns about the criminalization of solidarity with Palestine and the suppression of dissent.
Israel security minister calls to arrest anyone who watches Al Jazeera channel
MEMO | June 20, 2025
Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir called Thursday for the arrest of anyone watching Al Jazeera TV channel which provides 24 hours coverage of the Israel-Iran conflict, claiming the network poses a “threat” to national security.
He also called to halt Al Jazeera’s broadcasts inside Israel.
Ben-Gvir said, “We will not allow Al Jazeera to broadcast from Israel. It endangers our national security”.
“I call on the public to report anyone who watches Al Jazeera”, said the far-right minister.
Israeli authorities have previously raided Al Jazeera’s offices several times and closed them down.
Mohammad Marandi: Iran Prepares for War with America
Prof. Seyed Mohammad Marandi and Prof. Glenn Diesen
Glenn Diesen | June 19, 2025
Seyed Mohammad Marandi is a professor at Tehran University and a former advisor to Iran’s Nuclear Negotiation Team. Prof. Marandi discusses the US preparations to enter the war directly, and Iran’s preparations to fight the US. Trump will only accept Iran’s surrender, yet he does not appear to have the means to achieve this objective. What will happen if US strikes are ineffective and US military assets in the region are attacked? The only path forward now is reckless escalation.
Israel’s war on Iran is not about nuclear weapons
It is, and has always been, about regime change and breaking the Axis of Resistance
By Robert Inlakesh | RT | June 19, 2025
The claim that has been adopted by the United States, Israel and its European partners, that the attack on Iran was a “pre-emptive” attempt to stop Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons, is demonstrably false. It holds about as much weight as the allegations against Iraq’s Saddam Hussein in 2003 and this war of aggression is just as illegal.
For the best part of four decades, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been claiming that Iran is on the verge of acquiring a nuclear weapon. Yet, every single attempt to strike a deal which would bring more monitoring and restrictions to Iran’s nuclear program has been systematically dismantled by Israel and its powerful lobbying groups in Western capitals.
In order to properly assess Israel’s attack on Iran, we have to establish the facts in this case. The Israeli leadership claim to have launched a pre-emptive strike, but have presented no evidence to support their allegations that Iran was on the verge of acquiring a nuclear weapon. Simply stating this does not serve as proof, it is a claim, similar to how the US told the world Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction.
Back in March, the US Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard testified before a Senate Intelligence Committee that the intelligence community “continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program he suspended in 2003.”
On top of this, Iran was actively participating in indirect negotiations with the US to reach a new version of the 2015 Nuclear Deal. Donald Trump announced Washington would unilaterally withdraw from the agreement in 2018, instead pursuing a “maximum pressure” sanctions campaign at the behest of Israel.
Despite the claims of Netanyahu and Trump that Iran was violating the Nuclear Deal, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) released a report which stated Iran was in full compliance with the deal at the time.
If you trace back every conversation with neo-conservatives, Israeli war hawks and Washington-based think tanks, their opposition to the Obama-era Nuclear Deal always ends up spiraling into the issues of Iran’s ballistic missile program and its support for regional non-State actors.
Israeli officials frequently make claims about Iran producing a nuclear weapon in “years”, “months” or even “weeks,” this has become almost second nature. Yet their main issue has always been with Iran’s support for groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, who strive for the creation of a Palestinian State.
Proof of all this is simple. Israel, by itself, cannot destroy Iran’s vast nuclear program. It is not clear the US can destroy it either, even if it enters the war. An example of the US’ ineffectiveness at penetrating Iranian-style bunkers, built into mountainous ranges, as many of Iran’s nuclear facilities are, was demonstrated through the American failure to destroy missile storage bases in Yemen with its bunker-buster munitions, which were dropped from B-2 bombers.
Almost immediately after launching his war on Iran, Netanyahu sent out a message in English to the Iranian people, urging them to overthrow their government in an attempt to trigger civil unrest. The Israeli prime minister has since all but announced that regime change is his true intention, claiming that the operation “may lead” to regime change.
Israel’s own intelligence community and military elites have also expressed their view that their air force alone is not capable of destroying the Iranian nuclear program. So why then launch this war, if it is not possible to achieve the supposed reason it was “pre-emptively” launched?
There are two possible explanations:
The first is that the Israeli prime minister has launched this assault on Iran as a final showdown in his “seven front war,” with which he hopes to conclude the regional conflict through a deadly exchange that will ultimately inflict damage on both sides.
In this scenario, the desired outcome would be to conclude the war with the claim that Netanyahu has succeeded at destroying or has significantly degraded Iran’s nuclear program. He would also throw in claims, like we already see him making, that huge numbers of Iranian missiles and drones were eliminated. This would also make the opening Israeli strike, which killed senior Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commanders and nuclear scientists, make sense. It would all be the perfect blend of propaganda to sell a victory narrative.
On the other hand, the assumption would be that Tehran would also claim victory. Then both sides are able to show the results to their people and tensions cool down for a while. If you are to read what the Washington-based think-tanks are saying about this, most notably The Heritage Foundation, they speak about the ability to contain the war.
The second explanation, which could be an added bonus that the Israelis and US are hoping could come as a result of their efforts, is that this is a full-scale regime change war that is designed to rope in the US.
Israel’s military prestige was greatly damaged in the Hamas-led attack on October 7, 2023, and since that time there has been no victory achieved over any enemy. Hamas is still operating in Gaza and is said to have just as many fighters as when the war began, Hezbollah was dealt significant blows but is still very much alive, while Yemen’s Ansarallah has only increased its strength. This is an all round stunning defeat of the Israeli military and an embarrassment to the US.
As is well known, Iran is the regional power that backs all of what is called the Axis of Resistance. Without it, groups like Hezbollah and Hamas would be significantly degraded. Evidently, armed resistance to Israeli occupation will never end as long as occupied people exist and live under oppressive rule, but destroying Iran would be devastating for the regional alliance against Israel.
The big question however, is whether regime change is even possible. There is a serious question mark here and it seems much more likely that this will end up on a slippery slope to nuclear war instead.
What makes the Israeli-US claim that this war is somehow pre-emptive, for which there is no proof at all, all the more ridiculous of a notion, is that if anything, Iran may now actually rush to acquire a nuclear weapon for defensive purposes. If they can’t even trust the Israelis not to bomb them with US backing, while negotiations were supposed to be happening, then how can a deal ever be negotiated?
Even in the event that the US joins and deals a major blow to the Iranian nuclear program, it doesn’t mean that Iran will simply abandon the program altogether. Instead, Tehran could simply end up rebuilding and acquiring the bomb years later. Another outcome of this war could end up being Israeli regime change, which also appears as if it could now be on the table.
Robert Inlakesh is a political analyst, journalist and documentary filmmaker currently based in London, UK. He has reported from and lived in the Palestinian territories and currently works with Quds News. Director of ‘Steal of the Century: Trump’s Palestine-Israel Catastrophe’.

