Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

THE CHILDREN GAMBIT

How Europe’s Political Class Weaponises Innocence — and Has Been Building This Machine for Years

Islander Reports | February 17, 2026

Before we start. These platforms aren’t innocent. They’ve extracted billions from our attention, manipulated our children’s dopamine cycles, censored truth tellers, handed our data to surveillance capitalism and slept soundly every night. Hold that. And then read what follows anyway — because what’s happening right now is something else entirely.

Let’s start with the money. Because the money never lies.

€1.2 billion. Ireland’s Data Protection Commission. Meta. May 2023. The largest GDPR fine in history, for routing EU citizen data to the United States without adequate protection. A record that lasted about five minutes.

€530 million. TikTok. May 2025. Same Irish authority. For sending European user data to China and then, this is the part they buried in the press release — lying about it during the inquiry. TikTok told regulators throughout the investigation it wasn’t storing EEA data on Chinese servers. In February 2025, they quietly admitted it had been. All along.

€345 million. TikTok again. 2023. Children’s data. €14.5 million from the UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office on top of that, same year, same issue. €91 million to Meta Ireland in September 2024 — they stored hundreds of millions of user passwords in plaintext. Just sitting there. No encryption. Exposed. €390 million to Meta the year before, for forcing users to accept personalised advertising as a condition of accessing their own accounts.

And then December 5th, 2025. The European Commission handed X — formerly Twitter, now Elon Musk’s megaphone and the primary target of every European leader who’s discovered that their citizens can organise against them online — a €120 million fine. First ever penalty under the Digital Services Act. For misleading users about the blue verification badge, concealing advertiser identities, and blocking government-approved researchers from accessing algorithmic data.

Over €2.5 billion. Just the verdicts. Just the ones that made it to conclusion. Fourteen active DSA proceedings still grinding through the machinery, with Meta and TikTok each facing potential fines of 6% of global revenue. That’s €9.9 billion for Meta. €9.3 billion for ByteDance. Numbers large enough to restructure companies. Numbers designed to make platforms obedient.

So when Pedro Sanchez walked out this morning and announced that Spain’s Council of Ministers would invoke Article 8 of the Organic Statute of the Public Prosecution Service — sic prosecutors onto X, Meta and TikTok for “crimes they may be committing” through AI-generated child pornography — understand what you’re looking at.

This isn’t a regulator at the end of its rope. This is a political class that has already built the machine, tested the machine, extracted billions through the machine — and is now deciding what else the machine can reach.

“May Be Committing”

That’s the phrase. Not “has committed.” Not “is committing.” May be. Sanchez posted it on X — the very platform he’s threatening to prosecute — and the media swallowed it whole, no questions about evidence or methodology or whether a public prosecutor’s office is the right instrument for making technical judgements about AI image generation pipelines.

The Spanish government claims Grok produced three million sexualised images in eleven days, including over 23,000 involving minors. Strong numbers. Specific numbers. Precise to the point of being designed to prevent challenge — because you can’t interrogate evidence you haven’t been shown, and asking to see it means you’re defending the indefensible. Not one published source. Not one independent methodology. They arrived complete, ready-made for outrage.

That’s the genius of it. The children gambit works precisely because you cannot question it without becoming the villain of the story.

Pavel Durov said it plainly — and look, nobody should hold Durov up as a civic virtue. But he’s spent years watching governments use platform regulation as a control mechanism, and when he says Sanchez’s moves aren’t safeguards but steps toward total control, he’s speaking from operational experience. He’s seen this architecture before. From the inside.

Here’s what this moment actually is, in the longer register. Every time a Western liberal government needs to consolidate control over the information environment, it finds a victim group whose protection cannot be questioned. In the 20th century they used communists, terrorists, drug dealers. The 21st century discovered something more powerful — children. Unimpeachable. Unchallengeable. A shield so morally absolute that any surveillance infrastructure built behind it arrives pre-legitimised. Sanchez didn’t invent this playbook. He’s just the current page.

Here’s the question nobody in any press conference asked today. If you actually wanted to protect children from AI-generated abuse material — if that were the genuine, singular, burning priority — what would you do?

You’d hunt the producers. Fund specialist cyber units with the resources and legal powers to identify, locate and prosecute the people who generate and distribute child sexual abuse material. Build better reporting pipelines so victims and witnesses have direct, fast routes to enforcement. Nail the distribution networks — the forums, the channels, the file-sharing infrastructure where this material moves — with targeted operations and international cooperation. Invest in takedown technology that works at scale. These are the unglamorous tools of actual child protection. Forensic. Technical. Expensive. Slow. Not suited to a press conference.

None of that is what Sanchez announced today. What he announced was prosecution of three of the most visible American technology platforms, with unverified statistics, under a legal mechanism designed for emergency government intervention in the public interest — on the same morning Keir Starmer in London announced restrictions on the last tool of genuine online privacy.

That’s not child protection. That’s the political class treating every ordinary user as a pre-suspect, building infrastructure that watches everyone in order to catch a tiny minority — and using the minority as the justification.

When someone says “think of the children,” look at what they’re actually building. Because what they’re building right now, across Europe and Britain, is an internet where you need permission to speak.

The Network They Actually Protected

Let’s be precise about who’s invoking children to demand your identity.

Jeffrey Epstein ran an international child trafficking operation for decades. Not speculation. Court and DOJ documents. Thirty-five girls identified by Palm Beach police in 2005. FBI reports going back to 1996. Federal prosecutors in Florida prepared a 60-count draft indictment in 2007 — conspiracy, sex trafficking of minors, enticement — charging Epstein and three co-conspirators described as employees who “persuaded, induced, and enticed individuals who had not attained the age of 18 years to engage in prostitution.”

The names of those three co-conspirators were in the indictment. Then US Attorney Alexander Acosta gave Epstein 13 months in county jail with work release six days a week and immunity for “any potential co-conspirators” — in direct violation of federal victims’ rights law. The investigation was shut down. Epstein walked. The network persisted.

Fast forward. January 2026. Department of Justice releases 3 million pages (a mere 2% of what they have in possession) under a law Congress passed unanimously demanding transparency. Victims’ names exposed. Driver’s licenses published. Witness statements naming perpetrators? Redacted. Draft indictment naming co-conspirators? Still redacted. Attorneys for over 200 victims called it “the single most egregious violation of victim privacy in one day in United States history” and accused DOJ of “hiding the names of perpetrators while exposing survivors.”

Congressmen like Thomas Massie had to read names aloud on the House floor before DOJ would release them. Rep. Ro Khanna: “The survivor statements to the FBI naming rich and powerful men who went to Epstein’s island, his ranch, his home — who raped and abused underage girls — they were all hidden.”

Now look at who’s demanding you hand over your identity to speak online.

Keir Starmer — the man proposing VPN bans and bypassing Parliament to regulate your thumbs on a screen — appointed Peter Mandelson as UK Ambassador to the United States in December 2024. Mandelson called himself Epstein’s “best pal” in Epstein’s 50th birthday book. Their friendship continued after Epstein’s 2008 conviction. Emails released in the January 2026 DOJ files show Mandelson received £75,000 in payments from Epstein between 2003-2004, leaked classified government information to him while serving as Business Secretary in 2009-2010, and sent messages suggesting Epstein was wrongfully convicted.

Starmer knew about the Epstein connection when he made the appointment. Mandelson had already resigned from government twice before — conflicts of interest, financial misconduct — and the Epstein relationship was public record. Starmer appointed him anyway. Made him Britain’s top diplomat. Gave him the US ambassador post. When the files dropped and the depth of the relationship became undeniable, Starmer’s chief of staff Morgan McSweeney — who recommended Mandelson — resigned. Then Starmer’s communications director. Then his cabinet secretary. Three senior aides gone in days.

Mandelson is now under criminal investigation by the Metropolitan Police for misconduct in public office. US Congress has requested he submit to interview as part of its investigation into Epstein’s co-conspirators and enablers.

And Starmer — whose government just had VPN downloads surge 1,800% because British citizens don’t trust him with their browsing data — is the man now lecturing the public about online child safety.

This isn’t hypocrisy. It’s consistency. The same political class that gave Epstein’s network immunity and protected co-conspirators for two decades is now demanding total visibility over your identity. The same Department of Justice that hid perpetrators and exposed survivors is the one telling you encryption backdoors are necessary to protect children. The same institutions that shut down the Epstein investigation in 2008 and buried the names in 2026 are building the Digital Identity Wallet, the fact-checker networks, the 24-hour removal mandates.

When they say this is about protecting children, look at the Epstein files. Look at who they protected. Look at who they prosecuted. Look at who they gave immunity. Look at whose names are still redacted while survivors’ information gets published.

Then ask yourself why these exact same people need to know who you are before you’re allowed to speak.

What This Actually Is — Unelected, Unaccountable, and Expanding

Here’s what nobody in the mainstream coverage will say: the regulatory apparatus now targeting these platforms was not built by people you voted for.

Picture what happens when a flag arrives. It’s 2am. A compliance officer at a major platform — a 26-year-old in Dublin or Amsterdam with a policy degree and a quota — opens an alert. A Brussels-appointed body has flagged a post as potentially harmful. The DSA gives the platform 24 hours to act or face fines of up to 6% of global revenue. There’s no named accuser. No court order. No adversarial process. Just a designation, a deadline, and a number so large that hesitation is financially irrational. The post gets removed. The writer wakes up to find their words gone. The politician whose opponents wrote it points elsewhere. The regulator points at the law. The compliance officer points at the process.

Nobody elected any of them.

The European Commission is not elected. Its commissioners are appointed by governments, approved by a parliament most Europeans couldn’t name the composition of — and its enforcement apparatus, the officials running fourteen DSA proceedings and handing out nine-figure fines, operates at a distance from democratic accountability that is not incidental but structural. The “trusted flaggers” embedded in the DSA framework, deputised to mark content for priority removal, are appointed bodies. Ofcom in the UK is a regulator, not an elected chamber. The European Board for Digital Services, coordinating enforcement across 27 countries, answers to no electorate anywhere on earth.

Sanchez and Starmer announce the intention. The technocrats execute it. And when it goes wrong — when the journalist’s article vanishes into a compliance process with no appeal, when the civil servant’s flagging of “migrant hotel” videos turns out to be political interference dressed as child protection — there is no one to vote out. The politician points at the regulator. The regulator points at the law. The law was written in workshops whose attendees you’ll never know. Democratic majorities change. Regulatory architecture doesn’t.

That’s not a flaw in the system. It’s the system working exactly as it was designed.

Britain and the VPN — The Moment the Mask Slipped

The week before Sanchez made his announcement, Keir Starmer was in London saying “no platform gets a free pass.” New powers to restrict social media. AI chatbots brought under the Online Safety Act. Infinite scrolling — the physical act of moving your thumb down a screen — to be regulated. Action in “months, not years.” And crucially, explicitly, openly: bypassing the parliamentary scrutiny that would normally apply to legislation this significant. He said it out loud. The urgency is too great for debate.

But the detail that should stop every person who cares about liberty cold is the VPN proposal.

Let’s be clear about what a VPN actually is, because the political class is clearly hoping you don’t know and don’t care to find out.

A Virtual Private Network encrypts your internet connection and masks your IP address — your digital location, the identifying tag that follows you across every website you visit, that your internet service provider logs, that governments can and do compel ISPs to hand over. When you use a VPN, your traffic passes through an encrypted tunnel. Your ISP sees that you’re connected to a VPN server. That’s it. They cannot see where you go. They cannot see what you say. They cannot read your communications.

This is the tool that domestic abuse survivors use to hide their location from abusers. That investigative journalists use to protect their sources. That activists use to organise without government surveillance. VPNs aren’t a loophole. They’re a lifeline.

After the UK Online Safety Act came into force, VPN downloads in Britain surged by 1,800%. Half the top ten apps in British app stores became VPN services. Ordinary British citizens — not criminals, not paedophiles, not terrorists — reached for the exact same tool that people under authoritarian regimes use to avoid state surveillance, because they didn’t want to submit government-verified identity just to browse normally.

Starmer’s response to that 1,800% signal was to propose restricting VPNs.

Not to reconsider whether the surveillance infrastructure was too invasive. Not to ask why a free people felt the need for anonymity tools in a democracy. No — the tool of privacy is the problem. The loophole to be closed.

And here’s the thing that proves this was never about children. Ban commercial VPNs tomorrow and any determined teenager circumvents it within hours — cheap cloud servers, open proxies, custom tunnels for less than a dollar a month. The only people genuinely impacted are the ones relying on them for legitimate safety: the abuse survivor hiding their location, the journalist protecting a source, the person who simply doesn’t want their ISP building a commercial profile of their private reading habits. A VPN ban doesn’t protect children. It closes the last gap in the surveillance infrastructure — means that when the DSA triggers an investigation into your political commentary, when the Brussels-appointed fact-checker flags your article, there’s nowhere left to go. No tunnel. No private space. Just a 1984 dystopian, digitally enhanced.

The Wallet Nobody’s Talking About

Beneath all of this — quieter, slower, more permanent than any headline — is the piece of architecture that makes everything else irrelevant to debate once it’s in place.

By December 2026, every EU member state is legally required to provide its citizens with a European Digital Identity Wallet. Not a proposal. Law — Regulation EU 2024/1183, in force since May 2024. Major platforms will be required to accept it as a login mechanism. The private sector — banks, retailers, online services, social media — can request verified identity information through it.

Brussels will tell you the privacy protections are robust. And it’s worth taking that position seriously, because it isn’t entirely dishonest.

Article 5a of the regulation is real. It states explicitly that relying parties — the companies and platforms using the wallet — “shall not refuse the use of pseudonyms, where the identification of the user is not required by Union or national law.” The Commission points to this as the safeguard. They have a point. It’s in the law. It’s binding. If you want to use your wallet pseudonymously on a platform that has no legal requirement to know who you are, the regulation says you can. Proponents argue this is a meaningful, enforceable right — and that critics conflating the wallet with mandatory real-name requirements are misreading the text.

The problem is the eleven words the Commission would prefer you not to dwell on: where the identification of the user is not required by Union or national law.

That clause means the pseudonymity right exists only in the space where no law has yet required your identity. It is protection that any member state can legislate away, for any service, with a single national law and a stated reason. Child protection. Anti-terrorism. Financial crime. Age verification. The reasons are not hard to find. The EU has no override mechanism — Brussels cannot prevent a member state from passing a law that, in its domestic application, triggers the exception and requires identification. So the right survives only until a government decides it shouldn’t. One parliament. One vote. The pseudonymity is gone for that service, in that country — legally, permanently, with the full blessing of the regulation’s own text.

And there’s something else the Commission won’t volunteer. The architecture meant to enforce the pseudonymity right — the mechanism that would actually prevent platforms from demanding your identity when they have no legal right to — was quietly gutted in implementation. Privacy advocates at epicenter.works, the only civil society organisation that worked on this file throughout the entire reform process, found that the Commission made relying party registration certificates optional rather than mandatory. Without mandatory certificates, the wallet cannot verify whether a company’s request for your real identity is legitimate or overreaching. Tech giants can demand identification in contexts that don’t legally require it. There is no technical mechanism to stop them. The safeguard exists in the legislation. The infrastructure that would make the safeguard real was made optional in the implementing regulations.

The Commission was told this directly. They proceeded anyway.

Civil society organisations warned EU officials in an open letter that the wallet “may eliminate anonymity, leading to over-identification and a loss of privacy.” Unacknowledged. One hundred and thirteen free speech and privacy experts wrote separately to raise similar concerns about the broader regulatory framework. Ignored. The pattern of constructing the infrastructure first and addressing rights concerns later — or not at all — is not a run of oversight failures. It’s a consistent set of choices made by people who understood exactly what they were choosing.

The Machine Is Already Running

People keep framing this as something that might happen. Future concerns. Hypothetical overreach.

It’s not the future.

The European Democracy Shield is operational — fifty action points, a European Centre for Democratic Resilience, a state-funded network of fact-checkers on Brussels money with a Brussels mandate, described in their own documents as “rapid response capacity” for information “crises.” The Commission decides what a crisis is. There is no external appeal. Just a bureaucrat with a mandate to act within 24 hours and a definition of disinformation so broad that it extends, in the Commission’s own telling, to content “that is not illegal.”

How broad? In May 2025, the Commission hosted a closed-door workshop with platform compliance teams. Training exercises. Internal documents. The US House Judiciary Committee obtained these documents under subpoena — you can disagree with the committee’s politics but you can’t argue with what the documents actually show. One exercise asked participants how to handle a post: an image of a teenage Muslim girl in a hijab alongside the text “we need to take back our country.” The exercise classified the combination as “illegal hate speech” requiring removal. Now, a reasonable person might argue about that specific scenario. Fine. Argue it. But the fact that this is the level at which European regulators are working — training platform compliance teams to remove common political sentiment combined with religious imagery, in closed-door workshops, before any court has ruled, before any democratic debate has happened — tells you something important about where the definitions are pointing.

Think about what that means in practice. Not in theory — in practice. A compliance officer at a platform with 400 million users gets a flag from a Brussels-funded body. The post contains a political opinion combined with an image. The body has designated it harmful. The platform has 24 hours. The alternative is a fine that could be measured in billions. Nobody phones a judge. Nobody consults the person who wrote it. The post disappears. And when it does — when that specific combination of political sentiment and religious imagery gets quietly removed from 400 million people’s feeds at 2am by someone following a process designed in a workshop that was closed to the public — that isn’t a transparency obligation. That’s the state deciding what the public is allowed to see. And doing it with plausible deniability built in at every layer.

That fact-checker network plugs directly into DSA enforcement. Platforms — X, Meta, TikTok, and by mid-2026 almost certainly ChatGPT, which already has three times the user numbers needed to trigger Very Large Online Platform designation — will be legally required to act on those findings. Not consider them. Act. Within 24 hours. Or face fines of 6% of global revenue.

The €120 million fine X received in December 2025 wasn’t for hosting child abuse content. It was for opacity — for not giving government-approved researchers access to the recommendation algorithm that determines what information reaches citizens. The Commission called it a transparency obligation. What it actually was: the state asserting the right to see inside the machine that shapes what the public thinks, so it can instruct the machine to shape it differently.

And when the Digital Identity Wallet closes the last gap — when the pseudonymity is quietly legislated away by a member state with a “reason,” when the VPN tunnel gets restricted, when every platform knows exactly who is saying what with a government-verified name attached — the system is complete. Everyone who speaks online, identified. Everything said, attributable. Every flag by a Brussels-appointed body, actionable within a day.

All of it constructed, piece by deliberate piece, in the name of protecting children from harm.

Final thoughts

The Soviet Union had a name for the officials who ran its censorship apparatus. Guardians of the public good. They had fact-checkers — called editors, party reviewers, information officers. Rapid response systems. Legal frameworks for acting on speech that threatened the stability of the state. Most of them genuinely believed they were protecting something real. That’s what makes these systems so durable — the people inside them are sincere.

They didn’t think of themselves as censors either.

What you are watching, from Madrid to London to Brussels, is the construction of a digital order in which the ability to speak freely, anonymously, without state knowledge, is being dismantled — not through jackboots but through frameworks, directives, DSA workshops, government-funded fact-checker networks, and the entirely reasonable-sounding proposition that we must protect our children.

Sánchez is a man whose government has been at war with X since the platform gave his opponents a direct line to Spanish voters that bypassed media institutions his party spent years cultivating. Starmer is a man whose government monitored social media during a domestic political crisis and then moved to expand its legal authority over the very platforms that let citizens talk about what they saw. The European Commission is a body of unelected officials who trained platform compliance teams, in closed-door workshops, to remove political sentiment they’d categorised as harmful — and then ignored 113 experts who wrote to warn them what they were building.

Keir Starmer is a man who appointed an Epstein associate as his personal envoy to Washington, knowing the relationship, knowing the history, and when it collapsed appointed himself the guardian of online child safety

These. Are. The self appointed guardians of the children.

They gave Epstein’s co-conspirators immunity and are still hiding their names two decades later. But they need to know yours before you can post a political opinion. They protected a trafficking network with clients in the highest levels of Western power. But you’re the threat that requires a Digital Identity Wallet. They redacted the men who procured children for a convicted paedophile while publishing the victims’ driver’s licenses. But your VPN is the problem that demands legislative action.

Call that what it is.

They didn’t prosecute the network because they were the network’s best customers. So how dare they invoke children’s safety to strip yours.

€2.5 billion extracted. Fourteen proceedings active. A Digital ID mandate rolling out across 27 countries by year’s end. VPNs under legislative attack in the birthplace of the Magna Carta. Parliamentary scrutiny openly bypassed in London. A Democracy Shield with a rapid response protocol for information crises that no one elected anyone to define.

They’ve been building this for ten years. The fines, the frameworks, the wallets, the fact-checkers, the VPN bans, the bypassed parliaments. Layer by layer. Always with a reason. Always with a child somewhere in the justification.

They’re nearly done.

And when it’s finished — when the wallet is in your pocket, the fact-checkers are wired to the platforms, the pseudonymity has been legislated away in some member state that needed a “reason,” the last encrypted tunnel closed — they will stand in front of all of it and tell you it was always, only, ever about the children.

An internet where you need permission to speak isn’t a safer internet. It’s a controlled one.

Epstein’s co-conspirators walk free while you need state permission to call them what they are.

Believe them if you want. History will know what it was.

February 17, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , | Comments Off on THE CHILDREN GAMBIT

Spain announces major social media crackdown

RT | February 3, 2026

Spain will ban social media use for children under 16 and hold tech executives personally accountable for “hateful content” spread on their platforms, Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez announced on Tuesday.

Speaking at the World Government Summit in Dubai, Sanchez said that his administration will implement five measures to regulate social media, with sweeping consequences for free speech.

“First, we will change the law in Spain to hold platform executives legally accountable for many infringements taking place on their sites,” he announced, explaining that executives who fail to remove “criminal or hateful content” will face criminal charges.

Most jurisdictions view social media sites as ‘platforms’ rather than ‘publishers’, meaning users themselves are responsible for the content they post. Sanchez’ proposed change goes beyond the scope of the EU’s Digital Services Act, which mandates fines for platforms that fail to remove “disinformation” after being alerted to it.

Sanchez did not explain what constitutes “hateful content,” while the text of the DSA does not explain the term “disinformation.”

Sanchez said that his government would also turn “algorithmic manipulation and amplification of illegal content” into a criminal offense, track and study “how digital platforms fuel division and amplify hate,” ban social media use for under-16s, and launch a criminal investigation into alleged offenses committed by Grok, TikTok, and Instagram.

During his speech, Sanchez personally singled out X owner Elon Musk, accusing the billionaire of spreading “disinformation” about his decision to grant amnesty to half a million illegal immigrants last week. On Sunday, Musk accused Spanish MEP Irene Montero of “advocating genocide” after she declared that she wants a “replacement of right-wingers” by migrants.

Sanchez said that five other European countries, which he called a “coalition of the digitally willing,” would pass similar legislation. France passed a much narrower bill banning under-15s from social media last week, while Greece is “very close” to announcing a similar ban, Reuters reported on Tuesday.

February 3, 2026 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , | Leave a comment

Spain Opens Probe Into Israeli Tourism Firms

IMEMC | January 26, 2026

Spain’s Ministry of Social Rights, Consumer Affairs, and Agenda 2030 has opened a formal investigation into Israeli tourism companies suspected of promoting goods or services linked to Israeli colonies built on occupied Palestinian land.

In a statement issued Sunday, the ministry said the inquiry aims to determine whether companies operating in Spain have advertised or sold tourism‑related services connected to Israeli colonies in the occupied West Bank, in violation of Spanish law.

The investigation is based on Royal Decree‑Law 10/2025, which prohibits the advertising of goods or services originating from occupied territories.

The decree was adopted in September 2025 as part of Spain’s emergency measures responding to the genocide in Gaza and to ensure that companies operating in Spain do not profit from activities tied to Israel’s occupation.

According to the ministry, the probe focuses on allegations that certain Israeli tourism firms promoted services linked to colonies illegally constructed on Palestinian land under military occupation.

Spanish officials emphasized that such activity would constitute illegal advertising under the decree, given the internationally recognized status of the West Bank as occupied territory and the illegality of Israeli colonial activity under international law.

The ministry stated that the purpose of the inquiry is to identify all companies involved and determine whether their conduct violates Spanish consumer and advertising regulations. If breaches are confirmed, authorities may impose sanctions or restrict the companies’ ability to operate commercially in Spain.

Spanish officials underscored that the investigation reflects the government’s commitment to ensuring that businesses in Spain do not contribute to or profit from Israel’s ongoing occupation of Palestinian land.

All of Israel’s colonies in the occupied West Bank, including those in and around occupied East Jerusalem, are illegal under International Law, the Fourth Geneva Convention, in addition to various United Nations and Security Council resolutions. They also constitute war crimes under International Law.

Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits collective punishment and acts of terror against civilian populations.

Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention states: “The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.” It also prohibits the “individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory”.

Articles 53 and 147 prohibit the destruction of civilian property and classify pillage as a war crime.

January 26, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation | , , , , | Leave a comment

US Weighs Port Restrictions on Spain Over Israel Arms Transit Ban

teleSUR | December 20, 2025

The United States is considering restrictive measures against Spanish-flagged vessels following Spain’s decision to block the transit of US military cargo bound for Israel through its territory, prompting a formal investigation by US maritime authorities.

In late September this year, the Spanish government led by Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez prohibited the transit of US aircraft and ships carrying weapons, ammunition, or military equipment destined for Israel through the military bases of Rota, in Cádiz, and Morón de la Frontera, in Seville. The measure was adopted in protest against Israel’s war in the Gaza Strip.

The Joint Spanish–US Committee confirmed the decision, clarifying that the ban applies both to aircraft and vessels heading directly to Israel and to those bound for the country after intermediate stopovers.

Washington responded on Friday through the Federal Maritime Commission (FMC), which said it is considering closing US ports to Spanish ships while it investigates Spain’s refusal to allow US cargo vessels carrying arms to Israel to dock at the port of Algeciras, in southern Spain.

In a statement, the FMC said it is examining options that include cargo limitations, denial of entry to vessels operating under the Spanish flag, or fines of up to $2.3 million per voyage for Spanish-flagged ships.

Spain has prohibited the transfer of US weapons to Israel through the military bases of Rota and Morón, facilities located on Spanish territory but used by the United States under bilateral defense agreements.

US authorities view Spain’s stance as a challenge. The FMC said it is gathering information on “the current policy of Spain of denying or rejecting port access to certain vessels carrying cargo to or from Israel,” which, according to the commission, may be creating “unfavorable general or special conditions for maritime transport in US foreign trade.” The FMC, which is independent of the US government, stressed the urgency of completing its investigation to determine what “corrective measures may be appropriate to address such conditions.”

According to sources from Spain’s Ministry of Defense cited by Europa Press in September, the Defense Cooperation Agreement governing military collaboration between the two countries will not be amended. As a result, US-operated military bases in Spain remain excluded from arms embargoes.

Under Article 32 of the agreement, the United States must obtain authorization from the Permanent Committee, which operates under Spain’s Ministry of Defense, for operations involving the loading or unloading of munitions and explosives, as well as their transport by land, sea, or air within Spanish territory. However, the United States is not required to disclose the final destination of such cargo when stopovers are involved.

Spain reaffirmed in September its decision to halt arms sales to Israel, a move that has been questioned by some reports. The country has also taken broader diplomatic steps critical of Israel’s actions in the occupied Palestinian territories.

In late May 2024, Madrid formally recognized the State of Palestine and later joined South Africa’s case against Israel at the International Court of Justice, accusing it of committing genocide in the besieged Gaza Strip.

December 20, 2025 Posted by | War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Leave a comment

Spain’s COVID restrictions declared unconstitutional, over 90k fines struck down

By Andreas Wailzer | LifeSiteNews | October 10, 2025

More than 90,000 COVID fines have been overturned so far after the Spanish constitutional court declared the draconian 2020 COVID measures unconstitutional.

As Spanish news outlet The Objective reported, 92,278 fines have been annulled as of September 3, 2025, following the declaration of certain provisions of the 2020 state of emergency decree, which was in effect during the first COVID-19 lockdown, as unconstitutional.

However, these penalties only represent the first wave of fines set to be annulled, with many more expected to follow. During the strict lockdown under the state of alarm in 2020, more than 1 million penalties were imposed nationwide, and an estimated 1.3 million people were fined for violating the prohibitive restrictions.

In its ruling, the Constitutional Court determined that certain sections of Article 7 of Royal Decree 463/2020, which pertains to the general prohibition on movement, implied an unjustified suspension of the fundamental right to freedom of movement, rather than merely a limitation. This suspension exceeded the power of the declared state of alarm, the court found. The court determined that such a severe restriction could only have been implemented under a stricter state of emergency, which requires more rigorous parliamentary proceedings.

This ruling now retroactively applies to all penalties issued during the 2020 lockdown, putting a significant burden on the administrative state. The Objective reports that “enforcement has been slow and uneven depending on each territory,” showing that the refunds could take months or years.

The Objective reiterates that the 92,278 cases revoked to date “are just the tip of the iceberg of a regulatory crisis” stemming from the draconian lockdown policies imposed by the Spanish government in 2020.

October 12, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , | Leave a comment

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

Press TV – October 7, 2025

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

UK Digital ID Scheme Faces Backlash Over Surveillance Fears — Is a Similar Plan Coming to the U.S.?

By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender |October 2, 2025

The U.K. plans to introduce a nationwide digital ID scheme that will require citizens and non-citizens to obtain a “BritCard” to work in the U.K., which includes England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Government officials say the plan, to take effect no later than August 2029, will help combat illegal immigration.

But critics like U.K. activist and campaigner Montgomery Toms said the scheme, “far from being a tool for progress,” is instead a “gateway to mass surveillance, control and ultimately the rollout of a centralised social credit system.”

The plan faces broad opposition in the U.K., according to Nigel Utton, a U.K.-based board member of the World Freedom Alliance, who said, “the feeling against the government here is enormous.”

A poll last week found that 47% of respondents opposed digital ID, while 27% supported the ID system and 26% were neutral. The poll was conducted by Electoral Calculus and Find Out Now, on behalf of GB News.

A petition on the U.K. Parliament’s website opposing plans to introduce digital ID may force a parliamentary debate. As of today, the petition has over 2.73 million signatures.

According to The Guardian, petitions with 100,000 signatures or more are considered for debate in the U.K. parliament.

As opposition mounts, there are signs the BritCard may not be a done deal. According to the BBC, a three-month consultation will take place, and legislation will likely be introduced to Parliament in early 2026.

However, U.K. Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy said the government may push through its digital ID plans without going through the House of Commons or the House of Lords.

Protesters plan to gather Oct. 18 in central London.

Digital ID will ‘offer ordinary citizens countless benefits,’ U.K. officials say

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced the digital ID scheme last week in a speech at the Global Progress Action Summit in London.

“A secure border and controlled migration are reasonable demands, and this government is listening and delivering,” Starmer said. “Digital ID is an enormous opportunity for the U.K. It will make it tougher to work illegally in this country, making our borders more secure.

The plan “will also offer ordinary citizens countless benefits, like being able to prove your identity to access key services swiftly,” Starmer said.

According to The Guardian, digital ID eventually may be used for driver’s licenses, welfare benefits, access to tax records, and the provision of childcare and other public services.

Darren Jones, chief secretary to Starmer, suggested it may become “the bedrock of the modern state,” the BBC reported.

Supporters of the plan include the Labour Together think tank, which is closely aligned with the Labour Party and which published a report in June calling for the introduction of the BritCard.

Two days before Starmer’s announcement, the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change, led by Labour Party member and former U.K. Prime Minister Tony Blair, published a report, “Time for Digital ID: A New Consensus for a State That Works.”

Blair tried to introduce digital ID two decades ago as a means of fighting terrorism and fraud, but the plan failed amid public opposition. According to the BBC, Starmer recently claimed the world has “moved on in the last 20 years,” as “we all carry a lot more digital ID now than we did.”

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Blair endorsed a global digital vaccine passport, the Good Health Pass, launched by ID2020 with the support of Facebook, Mastercard and the World Economic Forum.

According to Sky News, French President Emmanuel Macron welcomed the BritCard for its ability to help fight illegal immigration into the U.K., much of which originates from France.

Critics: Digital ID marks ‘gateway to mass surveillance’

The BritCard, which would live on people’s phones, will use technology similar to digital wallets. People will not be required to carry their digital ID or be asked to produce it, except for employment purposes, the government said.

According to the BBC, BritCard will likely include a person’s name, photo, date of birth and nationality or residency status.

Digital wallets, which include documents such as driver’s licenses and health certificates, have been introduced in several countries, including the U.S.

Nandy said the U.K. government has “no intention of pursuing a dystopian mess” with its introduction of digital ID.

However, the plan has opened up a “civil liberties row” in the U.K., according to The Guardian, with critics warning it will lead to unprecedented surveillance and control over citizens.

“Digital ID systems are not designed to secure borders,” said Seamus Bruner, author of “Controligarchs: Exposing the Billionaire Class, their Secret Deals, and the Globalist Plot to Dominate Your Life” and director of research at the Government Accountability Institute. “They’re designed to expand bureaucratic control of the masses.”

Bruner told The Defender :

“All attempts to roll out digital ID follow a familiar pattern: corporate and political elites wield crises — such as mass migration, crime, or tech disruptions — as a pretext to expand their control … over private citizens’ identities, finances and movements into a suffocating regime.

“Once rolled out, these systems expand quietly, shifting from access tools to enforcement mechanisms. Yesterday it was vaccine passports and lockdowns; tomorrow it is 15-minute cities and the ‘universal basic income’ dependency trap. ‘Voluntary’ today becomes mandatory tomorrow.”

Tim Hinchliffe, editor of The Sociable, said digital ID is “not about tackling illegal immigration, it has nothing to do with job security and it definitely won’t protect young people online. Digital ID is all about surveillance and control through coercion and force.”

Hinchliffe said:

“Illegal immigration is just one excuse to bring it all online. Be vigilant for other excuses like climate change, cybersecurity, convenience, conflict, refugees, healthcare, war, famine, poverty, welfare benefits. Anything can be used to usher in digital ID.”

Twila Brase, co-founder and president of the Citizens’ Council for Health Freedom, said governments favor digital ID because it allows unprecedented surveillance.

The ID system “notifies the government every time an identity card is used, giving it a bird’s-eye view of where, when and to whom people are showing their identity,” she said.

According to Toms, “A digital ID system gives governments the ability to monitor, restrict, and ultimately punish citizens who do not comply with state directives. It centralises power in a way that is extremely dangerous to liberty.”

Experts disputed claims that digital ID is necessary to improve public services.

“The ‘improved efficiency’ argument is a technocratic fantasy used to seduce a public obsessed with convenience,” said attorney Greg Glaser. “Governments have managed to provide services for centuries without a digital panopticon. This is not about efficiency. It is about creating an immutable, unforgeable link between every individual and the state.”

Digital ID technology may create ‘an enormous hacking target’

London-based author and political analyst Evans Agelissopoulos said major global investment firms, including BlackRock, Vanguard and State Street, could combine their financial might with the power of digital ID.

“BlackRock, Vanguard and State Street are on a mission to buy properties to rent to people. Digital ID could be used against people they deem unfit to rent to,” he said.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the same firms supported digital vaccine passports in major corporations in which they are among the top shareholders. Some experts suggested digital ID may institutionalize a vaccine passport regime and central bank digital currencies.

“Digital identity is the linchpin to every dystopian nightmare under the sun,” Hinchliffe said. “Without it, there can be no programmable digital currencies, there can be no carbon footprint trackers, no social credit system.”

Other experts suggested that a centralized database containing the data of all citizens could be monetized. “By centralizing everything, they will have access to health, criminal, financial records. This data can be sold,” Agelissopoulos said.

According to Brase, those who will benefit from the centralization of this data include:

“Anybody who’s going to be the third-party administrator, academia and companies who are building biometric systems and what they call ‘augmented authentication systems’ that provide the cameras, the back system operations for biometric identification and for digital systems.”

Several major information technology (IT), defense and accounting firms, including Deloitte and BAE Systems, have received U.K. government contracts totaling 100 million British pounds ($134.7 million) for the development and rollout of BritCard.

U.S. tech companies, including Palantir, Nvidia and OpenAI, “have also been circling the UK government,” The Guardian reported.

Digital ID also raises security concerns, with IT experts describing the U.K.’s plan as “an enormous hacking target,” citing recent large-scale breaches involving digital ID databases in some countries, including Estonia.

“Government databases are frequently hacked — from healthcare systems to tax records,” Toms said. “Centralizing sensitive personal data into a single mandatory digital ID is a disaster waiting to happen.”

The public may also directly bear the cost of these systems. Italy’s largest digital ID provider, Poste Italiane, recently floated plans to levy a 5 euro ($5.87) annual fee for users.

Switzerland to roll out digital ID next year, amid controversy

In a referendum held on Sunday, voters in Switzerland narrowly approved the introduction of a voluntary national digital ID in their country.

According to the BBC, 50.4% of voters approved the proposal. Biometric Update noted that the proposal received a majority in only eight of the country’s 26 cantons, though the country’s government campaigned in favor of the proposal.

Digital ID in Switzerland is expected to be rolled out next year.

Swiss health professional George Deliyanidis said he “does not see any benefits for the public” from the plan. Instead, he sees “a loss of personal freedom.”

“There are suspicions of election fraud,” he added.

In a letter sent Tuesday to the Swiss government, a copy of which was reviewed by The Defender, the Mouvement Fédératif Romand cited “significant statistical disparities” in the referendum’s results and called for a recount.

In 2021, Swiss voters rejected a proposal on digital ID under which data would have been held by private providers, the BBC reported. Under the current proposal, data will remain with the state.

According to the Manchester Evening News, countries that have introduced nationwide digital ID include Australia, Canada, China, Costa Rica, Denmark, Estonia, India, Japan, South Korea, Spain, Ukraine and the United Arab Emirates. Other countries with similar systems include France, Finland and Norway.

In July, Vietnam introduced digital ID for foreigners living in the country. In August, the Vietnamese government helped neighboring Laos launch digital ID.

The New York Times reported that, in 2024, China added an “internet ID” to its digital ID system, “to track citizens’ online usage.”

Bill Gates has supported the rollout of digital ID in several countries, including India.

The European Union plans to launch its Digital Identity Wallet by the end of 2026.

“When you see a nearly simultaneous worldwide push, like this digital ID agenda, people in all nations need to expect to be impacted to some extent,” said James F. Holderman III, director of special investigations for Stand for Health Freedom.

Is national digital ID coming to the U.S.?

Although the U.S. does not have a national identification card, the U.K. did not have one either — until digital ID was introduced. The U.K. scrapped national ID in 1952.

In May, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) began Real ID enforcement for domestic air travelers in the U.S. In the months before, TSA engaged in a push to encourage U.S. citizens to acquire Real ID-compliant documents, such as driver’s licenses. Full enforcement will begin in 2027.

The REAL ID Act of 2005 established security standards for state-issued ID cards in response to the 9/11 attacks and the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. In the intervening years, its implementation was repeatedly delayed.

Last year, then-President Joe Biden issued an executive order for federal and state governments to speed up the adoption of digital ID.

Brase said Real ID “is really a national ID system for America, currently disguised as a state driver’s license with a star. The American people really have no idea that what’s in their pocket is a national ID and they have no idea that the [Department of Motor Vehicles offices] are planning to digitize them.”

Hinchliffe said 193 countries, including the U.S., accepted digital ID last year when they approved the United Nations’ Pact for the Future.

Earlier this month, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) introduced the Safeguarding Personal Information Act of 2025 (S 2769), a bill to repeal the REAL ID Act of 2005.

“If digital ID is allowed to spread globally, future generations will never know freedom,” Hinchliffe said.

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.

October 4, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Spanish PM reveals 9 measures to halt genocide in Gaza

Al Mayadeen | September 8, 2025

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez on Monday announced nine new measures aimed at stopping the “genocide in Gaza,” stating, in a televised address, “What Israel is doing is not defending itself, it is exterminating a defenseless population.”

He said that although Spain has de facto been applying an export ban on weapons to “Israel” since 2023, the government will now urgently legislate a “permanent” ban, a measure that will be joined by prohibiting ships transporting fuel to Israeli forces from using Spanish ports and banning aircraft carrying defense material from Spanish airspace.

The Spanish Premier added that individuals “directly involved in the genocide, violating human rights and war crimes in Gaza” will be prohibited from entering Spain.

Other measures include banning imports from illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank and Gaza, limiting Spanish consular services to Spanish citizens living in the occupied territories to the bare minimum, and increasing Spain’s presence in Rafah with additional troops and new joint projects with the Palestinian Authority to provide food and medicine.

Spain will also increase its contribution to the UN agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA) by €10 million ($11.7 million) and commit €150 million in additional humanitarian aid for Gaza in 2026.

“We know these measures will not be enough to put an end to the war crimes, but we hope they serve to apply pressure to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and alleviate the suffering of the Palestinian people,” Sanchez stated, adding that “Spain alone cannot stop the war, but that doesn’t mean we can’t try.”

September 8, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Solidarity and Activism | , , , , | Leave a comment

‘Unacceptable’: Spain condemns US visa ban on Palestinian officials

MEMO | August 30, 2025

Spain on Saturday condemned the US decision to revoke visas for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and 80 other officials, calling it “unacceptable” and urging the EU to take a leading role in defending Palestinian representation at the UN, Anadolu reports.

Spain’s Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Albares talked to reporters ahead of an informal meeting of EU foreign ministers in Copenhagen.

“It is unacceptable that the Palestinian delegation or Mahmoud Abbas couldn’t attend the UN General Assembly … its protection, its immunity is worldwide and the European Union must be at the forefront of those that defend it. That should also be a clear message from today’s meeting.”

Albares used the announcement to reiterate Spain’s call for urgent EU action on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, warning that words alone were no longer sufficient.

“The EU is doing too little, too late and doing nothing. Haven’t achieved anything. So the time of declaration is really over. We have to move forward,” he said, detailing a Spanish-proposed action plan.

“The European Union can only relate to Israel through human rights, and if there is a massive violation, as the report of the Commission has clearly indicated, we must act. This is not anymore the time of war. It’s the time for action, action to stop the war, action to break the blockade of famine from Israel to Gaza,” he added.

“Spain has proposed an action plan with things that, by the way, are nothing extraordinary. It’s just fulfilling and complying with our own European legislation or international legislation, that’s all and certainly, we are going to continue pushing forward,” he added.

Albares outlined four key measures for the EU.

“First to impose an arms embargo on selling weapons to Israel from the EU. Secondly, to enlarge the list of people that are being sanctioned, to anyone, absolutely anyone, that wants to spoil the two-state solution… Third, we have to back financially, very heavily, the Palestinian National Authority.”

“And fourth, we have to enforce and comply with all the rulings and all the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice, for instance, stopping all trade with products coming from the illegal settlements, and also we propose the full suspension of that agreement into the EU and Israel,” he added.

August 30, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Borrell calls for European action in Gaza even though he did nothing as top diplomat

By Ahmed Adel | August 28, 2025

The former EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell, laments the inaction of Brussels in the face of the ongoing “massacre” in Gaza and warns that its growing “discredit” will ultimately disqualify the bloc from implementing policies to defend human rights. However, the former diplomat, like the government of his home country, Spain, has only spoken out in support of Gaza and not taken any concrete actions.

“Someone would have to take legal action to make the European institutions do what they should do, and since it seems they don’t want to do it, there’s something called the courts of justice to take the case of inaction there,” Josep Borrell told the media at the August 25 opening of the Quo Vadis Europa course, which he directed at the Menéndez Pelayo International University (UIMP) in Santander, northern Spain.

Borrell, who headed EU diplomacy from 2019 to 2024, admitted that Brussels is doing “literally nothing” about the massacres perpetrated by the Israeli army and the induced famine.

“They say yes, maybe they’re going to make a proposal to establish some kind of sanction, but then they don’t do it,” he said.

The former diplomat also denounced the EU’s failure to fulfill its political and administrative obligations under the founding treaty of the bloc.

Borrell’s statements came in a context dominated by the resignation two days earlier of the Dutch ministers of Foreign Affairs, Interior, Education, and Health, along with four other secretaries of state, due to “resistance within the Cabinet” to taking action against Israel.

Led by Foreign Minister Caspar Veldkamp, ministers from the center-right NSC party had decided to ban the import of products from Israeli settlements in the West Bank. However, the other two parties in the governing coalition, the liberal VVD and the Farmer-Citizen Movement (BBB), believe the measure goes “too far.”

It also raises questions about why Borrell would make these statements during a summer school year and not utilize the influence and connections he supposedly has to lead a campaign to suspend the EU-Israel Association Agreement. In fact, he should have made them during his term.

The first report by the UN Special Rapporteur, Francesca Albanese, was released in March 2024, while Borrell concluded his term in November of that year. The report was titled “Anatomy of a Genocide,” in which she convincingly documented that a genocide was being committed in Gaza.

In 2024, a series of European committees and associations defending Palestine submitted a report to Brussels, requesting the termination of the association agreement with Israel. The report argued that Article 2 of the agreement, which pertains to respect for human rights, was being violated. In other words, Borrell was obviously aware of the situation he is now denouncing.

On the same day Borrell spoke, Israeli forces attacked the Nasser Hospital in Gaza with a double bombing, killing at least 14 people, including four journalists and several rescue workers. Spain immediately condemned the attack, calling it a “flagrant and unacceptable violation of international humanitarian law.”

In his message of condemnation on X, Foreign Minister José Manuel Albares stated that the “war in Gaza” must end and that “Spain works every day to achieve this.”

The reaction is illustrative of the way the EU and its national governments conduct themselves – issuing condemnations and more condemnations on social media, but taking no action to impose sanctions on those responsible for the famine.

Borrell’s statements serve as a kind of facelift for the Spanish government, which is also distinguished by its tendency to issue statements but not take effective measures. In fact, the Hague Group meeting to take effective measures was held in Colombia in July. Spanish representatives were present, but they did not speak out.

It is also worth noting that, unlike the Dutch Cabinet ministers, no Spanish minister has considered resigning for similar reasons. Ministers from Sánchez’s governing partner, the Sumar coalition, did not even seriously threaten to leave the government, despite the arms sales contracts with Israel remaining in effect.

Meanwhile, Borrel’s words about the need for “judicial action” are at odds with reality. Legal initiatives are already underway. For starters, South Africa filed a complaint against Israel for genocide with the International Court of Justice. Spain is not an effective party to the complaint and is not undertaking many of the actions it could be taking. In this way, Madrid evidently behaves in the same way as Borrell, just using rhetoric but not taking any actual action.

Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.

August 28, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Progressive Hypocrite, War Crimes | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Iran: West’s ‘ridiculous’ assassination claims cover for Israeli crimes

Press TV – August 1, 2025

Iran has dismissed “baseless and ridiculous” accusations from Western countries claiming that Tehran is collaborating with international criminal groups to carry out assassination plots abroad.

Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei condemned on Friday the anti-Iran claims made by the United States, Canada and a dozen European states in their joint statement released the previous day.

He said the “blatant blame game” is an attempt to divert public attention from the most pressing issue of the day, which is the Israeli genocide in the occupied Palestine.

“The United States, France, and other signatories to the anti-Iran statement must themselves be held accountable for actions that violate international law, as they support and host terrorist and violent elements and groups,” he added.

Baghaei touched on the unprovoked US-Israeli aggression against Iran in June and Israel’s ongoing genocide in the Gaza Strip against the backdrop of active support or approving silence of the 14 Western countries that signed the statement against the Islamic Republic.

He further denounced the accusations as “blatant lies and an escape forward, designed as part of a malicious Iranophobia campaign aimed at exerting pressure on the great Iranian nation.”

The 14 states must be held accountable for their “disgraceful and irresponsible” behavior that violates the principles of international law and the United Nations Charter, the spokesman noted.

Albania, Austria, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, the UK, and the US alleged in their statement that Iranian intelligence agencies are engaged in attempts to “kill, kidnap, and harass people in Europe and North America.”

August 1, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Progressive Hypocrite | , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Israeli strike on Natanz nuclear facility ‘crime against international law, NPT’: Iran FM

Press TV – June 15, 2025

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi says the Israeli strikes on the Islamic Republic’s Natanz nuclear facility were a major crime under international law and the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

In a phone conversation with Spain’s Foreign Minister José Manuel Albares Bueno on Sunday, Araghchi once again asserted the peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear program.

“The attack on the peaceful nuclear facilities of a country is absolutely prohibited, especially considering that Iran’s nuclear program is subject to the most stringent supervision (of the UN nuclear agency) and has been verified as per Resolution 2231 of the Security Council,” he said.

Iran expects that all countries and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) would condemn the Israeli aggression in the strongest terms, he added.

The Israeli regime, backed by the United States, carried out a large-scale military aggression on multiple locations inside Iran early on Friday, targeting nuclear facilities, military infrastructure, and residential buildings in Tehran and other cities.

The Natanz nuclear facility near Isfahan city was also hit, although only surface damage was caused because the centrifuges are buried deep underground. There were no radiation or casualties.

The Iranian foreign minister said the Israeli regime flagrantly violated the principles of the United Nations Charter and international law by conducting its acts of aggression in the midst of indirect nuclear talks between Iran and the United States.

Araghchi added that the Tel Aviv regime violated Iran’s sovereignty and territorial integrity by attacking nuclear facilities and residential areas inside the country just two days before the sixth round of Tehran-Washington talks in the Omani capital of Muscat.

“It is clear that the main objective of this act of aggression was to have a destructive impact on the diplomatic processes and to drag others into an unjust war,” the top Iranian diplomat emphasized.

Pointing to Israel’s record of attacks on residential areas and its killing of a large number of innocent women and children, he said, “Defense is the response to the aggression.”

Araghchi emphasized that the Iranian Armed Forces would strongly proceed with their “completely calculated defensive operation” to protect national sovereignty, territorial integrity, and civilians.

The Spanish foreign minister, for his part, expressed concern over the escalation of tensions in the region and voiced his country’s readiness to help ease the tensions.

June 15, 2025 Posted by | Progressive Hypocrite, War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries