Leaked chemical dossier reveals Israel’s role in Sudan’s civil war: Report
Press TV – September 11, 2026
A dossier of evidence alleging chemical weapons use by the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) was compiled by Israeli intelligence and shared with Western media outlets in a coordinated operation to discredit the army and bolster its paramilitary rival, a report says.
The dossier, described by the New York Times and Washington Post over the weekend as “shared by a Middle Eastern intelligence agency,” contained nearly 150 documents, bomb blueprints, images, videos, voice notes and several thousand intercepted text messages allegedly detailing how a secretive SAF unit developed and produced chlorine bombs over six months in 2024.
Multiple Sudanese and US sources told Middle East Eye that the “Middle Eastern intelligence agency” is Israeli, and that the dossier was nearly identical to one Israel handed to the US government before Washington sanctioned Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, leader of the SAF, in January 2025.
A former US official described the interception of vast numbers of messages as “an advertisement for Pegasus,” the spyware developed by Israeli cyber-intelligence firm NSO Group to infiltrate mobile phones.
“The thing that is shocking is how much Mossad has been tracking this,” one Sudanese security analyst, who could not be named, told Middle East Eye.
“I knew Mossad had interests in Sudan… but the level and depth and length of surveillance suggests that Israel is more involved in Sudan than we think.”
The revelations raise serious questions about Israel’s role in Sudan’s civil war and appear to confirm that Israeli intelligence is actively siding with the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) — whose main patron is the United Arab Emirates — against the Sudanese army.
On 13 September 2024, the RSF released a statement accusing the army of firing “toxic” missiles on al-Jaili, a crucial oil refinery north of Khartoum controlled at the time by the paramilitary.
There were no confirmed deaths in the attack, and there are no other confirmed occasions in which the SAF used chlorine bombs. The dossier does not contain medical evidence or testimony from any victims.
In a statement shared with Middle East Eye, the Sudanese government clarified that Sudan is a state party to the Chemical Weapons Convention and “has remained committed to its provisions and procedures, including the non-production, non-stockpiling and non-use of chemical weapons.”
It said that “all chlorine stocks in the country are designated exclusively for water purification, civilian industrial uses and energy, and it stands ready to demonstrate this before any competent international body.”
Israeli sources involved in the Zionist regime’s decision-making in the Horn of Africa have previously sought to develop and maintain relationships with a variety of different players, rather than backing one side or another.
“The Israeli love story with Hemedti intensified in 2021,” one North African analyst told Middle East Eye, referring to RSF head Muhammad Hamdan Dagalo Musa. The RSF chief was believed at the time and afterwards to have developed ties with Mossad.
In the leadup to Sudan’s war, then-Israeli foreign minister Eli Cohen met Burhan as part of what the Israelis called a “historic diplomatic visit” intended to pave the way for the finalization of a peace agreement. The war scuppered this.
But Hemedti maintained his ties with Israel, whose key ally the UAE continued to support the Sudanese paramilitary — charges Abu Dhabi still denies, despite mounting evidence, including from the United Nations.
“This feels like they are picking sides,” a former US official said of Israel, the dossier and the RSF. “The intelligence they shared with Washington succeeded in getting Burhan and the SAF sanctioned.”
“The Israel-UAE relationship has only grown deeper,” the source said.
Last month, Africa Intelligence reported that two of Hemedti’s brothers, Abdul Rahim and Algoney, had travelled secretly to Tel Aviv in May 2025 and again in February this year to meet with Israeli intelligence and foreign ministry officials.
The dossier’s Israeli origins fit a broader pattern of Israeli intelligence operations aimed at shaping narratives, influencing Western media and undermining governments that refuse to align with its regional agenda.
By feeding selectively leaked and unverified material to American newspapers, Israeli intelligence has succeeded in manufacturing a chemical weapons scandal that has been used to justify sanctions against Sudan’s army leadership while its rival — accused of genocide by the UN — receives continued support from Israel’s Persian Gulf allies.
Is the Noose Tightening on Iran?
By Bryan Anthony Reo – New Eastern Outlook – September 11, 2026
The Western takeover of Syria, the weakening of Hezbollah, and now the capitulation of Hamas signal that Western/American/Israeli penetration of Iranian outer defenses is essentially complete. The only remaining coherent and unassailed bastion outside of Iran is found among the Houthi. There remains Iran itself, which has weathered six months of American and Israeli aggression.
Western Encroachment on Russia from the South and West
Over the last fifteen or sixteen years, I have followed and analyzed certain developments across the Mediterranean, the Middle East, and Central Asia, and I have noticed a pattern, a theme, a trend — that trend being the dismantling of certain sovereign states aligned with Russia and Iran, or at least committed to their own sovereignty in resistance (or perhaps rather, ‘defiance’ is a better term) to the attempts at policy imposition by Western nations (usually the USA, sometimes France or the UK or Israel).
Iraq went down in 2003.
Then in the recent modern era, Libya was one of the first to be dismantled with the toppling and murdering of Colonel Gaddafi in 2011.
Syria followed in 2024, but fortunately Assad and his family were able to leave safely.
Lebanon was fractured and crippled decades ago and limps along on life support, with only Hezbollah holding the line to protect Lebanese national sovereignty.
Jordan was bought off and is a pathetic satellite of the USA, as is Egypt, with both of those nations having puppet governments that have betrayed their people and their regional partners for American dollars and Western approval.
It is now increasingly obvious and apparent that the Arab Spring was nothing more than a color revolution aimed at the Arab world, the way color revolutions occurred in Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova, and were attempted elsewhere (i.e., Belarus). The Arab Spring was intended to plunge the Arab/Islamic world into chaos and allow the replacement of the post-Cold War era Arab nationalist strongmen with weak, fractured coalition parliaments and fractured states or simply outright chaos (Libya) or Israeli/American puppet regimes.
In some sense, it would be reasonable to label the American advance across the Arab world, from North Africa to the Middle East, as long-term strategic “shaping operations” to remove genuinely sovereign and pro-Moscow governments from the board, so that American and Israeli positions throughout the region become almost unassailable and Russia is denied easy access to the Mediterranean and Iran is denied outer defensive bastions. This advance has been so blatant it is almost impossible not to notice, and attention must be called to it.
Iran Alone Defies America in Central Asia/Middle East
Iran and a few partners (Hezbollah, Houthi, etc.) throughout the region are all that remain in defiance of the Israelis and their American muscle/enforcers.
Syria has become a puppet satellite of the USA/Israel and has effectively ceded a large portion of southwestern Syria to the Israeli “security zone” that has resulted from Israel’s advance from the Golan Heights.
It should be increasingly obvious that Israel will never leave the territory it has occupied in Syria; it will move soldiers in, construct more permanent outposts, and then move settlers in.
Meanwhile, the Damascus branch of Al Qaeda, installed by the CIA and Mossad, is more concerned with trying to provide a legal basis by which they can murder former Syrian President Assad than with maintaining the territorial integrity of Syria against Israeli expansionism.
Across the border in Lebanon, Israel and the USA are working hard to plunge Lebanon into a renewed civil war, as that is the most probable outcome from the policy being foisted on Beirut, specifically the “disarm Hezbollah at all costs” policy. Any significant armed attempt by the anemic, corrupt, Western-aligned government in Beirut to disarm Hezbollah will likely result in a civil war.
While this is happening in the near periphery of Israel, closer to home, in Gaza, it appears that Hamas has capitulated, or at least their senior leaders are prepared to cut and run and toss their fighters under the bus so long as they have personal security guarantees and are able to depart Gaza with their families and wealth.
The disarmament of Hamas will begin the final chapter in the story of the Palestinian people, and this chapter will end with their permanent mass expulsion from the remnants of the Palestinian territories and the formal annexation of those territories into the state of Israel and their population by Zionist settlers.
It will also mean that in regard to the regional chessboard, the only pieces remaining on the board in opposition to Israel and America are essentially Hezbollah, the Houthi, and Iran itself.
Despite American Propaganda, Iran is Actually Winning
CNN claims “80% of all traffic transiting Hormuz is going through the American route,” which, on its face, is plausible and is likely the case.
However, the CNN article does not tell the actual story: that traffic transiting Hormuz is down at least 90-95%.
Thus the notion that “80% of all traffic transiting Hormuz uses the American route via Oman” becomes far less impressive when one analyzes it through the lens of the traffic being 95% reduced from where it had been before the war.
I once had a potential client ask me to take a loser of a case on contingency; he even said, “You can have 100% of the money,” after which I told a colleague, “One hundred percent of zero is still zero.”
80% of 5% is a minuscule 4%, which means 4% of the pre-war traffic is using the American route via Oman. This is hardly something to brag about and it is not evidence that Iran is days from collapse or that the USA has won or is in the process of winning.
By the very nature of the situation, Iran wins by default if the US fails to maintain Hormuz open and freely available for maritime commerce. If the USA is unable to subdue Iran, then Iran prevails. All Iran has to do is avoid losing. It is similar to how in a lawsuit the plaintiff has the burden to prosecute a claim against the defendant in order to succeed and prevail; if the defendant simply avoids losing, then the defendant wins. If Iran is able to avoid botching the defense of their country and come through the war with their regime intact and while maintaining control over the Strait, or at least effectively maintaining area denial of the Strait, then Iran wins.
The Americans can sink some Iranian ships and try a repeat of Operation Praying Mantis, but this isn’t the 1980s, and Iran is a much harder target.
The US can likely even manage commando raids and strikes on Kharg Island, but it won’t be able to take and hold the island. Likewise, the USA is not capable of taking and*holding Qeshm Island (something likely necessary to exercise any significant long-term control over the Strait of Hormuz). An American operation to seize Qeshm Island, unless it has a plan for how to resupply the occupying forces with food and water in the face of drone and missile attacks interdicting the supply craft, is essentially an operation in “how long can these men hold out until they have to surrender to Iran due to hunger and thirst.” In short, an American invasion and occupation of Qeshm Island would be extremely ill-advised, unless President Trump has some secret logistical weapon, or a “trump card” that the American public is simply not aware of.
Negotiations with Iran are the Only Way Forward (But Iran Has NO Reason to Trust Americans Now)
It is painfully obvious that the only way forward for the United States in regard to Iran is to enter into negotiations, negotiations that would have to be fair, reasonable, sincere, and honest. However, given the American tendency to engage in direct strikes and targeted killings (assassinations) of the people they are negotiating with, it is doubtful if the Iranians are going to believe anything the Americans have to say at this stage.
Negotiations with Iran would also require (at least implicitly) the recognition of Iran as having legitimate national and regional interests if not indeed being an actual regional power in Central Asia and the Middle East, something the United States appears unwilling to do, largely because of Israeli/Zionist influence being exerted on American policy.
How can any sincere American diplomat go to Iran and ask, in good faith, that they trust him? How can he suggest, in good faith, that they work with American envoys? We have an established record of murdering diplomats during breaks in diplomatic sessions. How does any nation recover and come back from this reputation?
Neo-Con Provocations and Delusions Hinder Negotiations
At the present time it seems the United States is living in a fantasy land where it can endlessly sustain and support Ukraine in its war against the Russian people in Donbas and Crimea (using Ukraine as a NATO puppet to advance NATO/American interests in Eastern Europe), escalate on the Korean Peninsula against North Korea; continue to aggress against Iran in the Persian Gulf and wider region; support Israel against Hamas and Hezbollah; support the Saudis against the Houthi; and pivot forces from Europe to the Pacific and East Asia as part of a long-term program to contain and curtail China as a prelude to attempting to dominate China.
It is a very ambitious American grand strategy, and while lacking the resources to be successfully pursued, it also lacks any coherent overarching worldview that would string it all together and explain the motive, reasoning, or the telos. At present, it seems America is a mediocre chess-player simply moving pieces back and forth across the board, without any rhyme or reason, although that is the conclusion one reaches at a casual glance. A more thorough analysis would reveal that America’s policy in regard to Iran is primarily aimed at fulfilling long-term Zionist ambitions in the region and providing a puppet government in Tehran amenable to the stationing of American military assets (including nuclear weapons) that would be used to coerce and threaten Russia for the purpose of pursuing the long-term American neo-con goal of causing the collapse of the Russian Federation as a coherent, centralized polity.
America is presently trying to escalate with Iran and Russia, and is always eager and willing to unnecessarily confront, provoke, or escalate with the DPRK and China as well.
What is the American End Goal? Short-Sighted Regime Change?
Let us suppose that American/Zionist goals are accomplished in Iran, and Iran collapses; at that point the USA will have opened a southern front against Russia, with the ability to threaten Russia by projecting power across the Caspian and by escalating provocations throughout the Caucasus region as a way to distract, divide, weaken, and strain Russian resources.
But to what end? For what purpose? Why? While attending recent seminars at the University of Oxford in Aristotle’s Politics and Nuclear/Particle Physics, I had the opportunity to discuss ongoing geopolitical matters with a variety of European classmates. The vast majority (80%) had the standard mainstream EU/UK/Atlanticist line, and some were militantly anti-Russian. One (a man born in the Latvian SSR in 1986) openly said he wanted to see “democracy” rise up in Iran, topple the Islamic Republic, and to see “Putin toppled” in Moscow, and Western liberal democracy take over Russia.
My challenge to all of that was multi-faceted, but one aspect I consistently hammered home was “Why? What comes next? The US has a very bad track record of collapsing regimes and dealing with the aftermath… Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria… Why would we want to collapse stable states such as Iran and Russia? Even if we could, why would we want to collapse those states? What about the aftermath? What about thinking five years or ten years down the road instead of just thinking about the next six months or twelve months? The leaders in Iran and Russia are reasonable and rational, and those powers being intact and stable are crucial to regional stability; why remove them and have them replaced with, well, who really knows, some unknown quantity that might be a lunatic or a zealot or something unreasonable.”
I have very little appetite, and no sympathy, for the view that the USA should lead the way in toppling all non-Western governments so they can be replaced by what would presumably be Western-aligned parliamentarian democracies of the plutocratic variety. Westerners, especially Atlanticists, are great at advocating for the setting of wildfires, and for starting those wildfires, but they seldom give much thought to what happens once they set a conflagration in motion.
Many of the Russophobes cannot see past their own hatred of Russia and of President Putin, and they cannot wrap their minds around the simple truth that the West is fortunate to be able to deal with and interact with a Russia that has historically strong and visionary leadership in the form of true statesmen such as Putin and Lavrov, who are well-educated, experienced, and have coherent and sensible worldviews shaped by a proper and true classical education, whereas most Western leaders are fungible, interchangeable bureaucrats educated in technocratic parliamentary procedure and institutional rules.
Much like we are with Iran, we in the West are squandering golden opportunities for historic cooperation and mutual benefit with Iran and Russia because we are pursuing absurd policies based on, well, frankly, crap beliefs, garbage intelligence, and an incoherent worldview formed in the crumbling and decaying ruins of post-modernity.
Whether or not the US is actually succeeding in tightening a noose against Iran, it is certainly expending significant resources in an effort to do so, although it presently seems to have very little to show for all the effort.
Bryan Anthony Reo is a licensed attorney based in Ohio and an analyst of military history, geopolitics, and international relations
Follow new articles on our Telegram channel
Douglas Macgregor: U.S. Defeated in Iran & Israel Will Not Survive
Glenn Diesen | September 9, 2026
Douglas Macgregor is a retired Colonel, combat veteran, and former senior advisor to the U.S. Secretary of Defense. Please like, subscribe & share!
Colonel Macgregor’s substack – Trump is not in Hell, Yet: https://substack.com/home/post/p-2140…
Follow Prof. Glenn Diesen:
Substack: https://glenndiesen.substack.com/
X/Twitter: https://x.com/Glenn_Diesen
Patreon:
/ glenndiesen
Support the research by Prof. Glenn Diesen:
PayPal: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/glenn…
Buy me a Coffee: buymeacoffee.com/gdieseng Go Fund Me: https://gofund.me/09ea012f
Buy Diesen merchandise: https://diesen-shop.fourthwall.com/en…
Israeli military court sentences Palestinian journalist to 4 years for ‘incitement’
MEMO | September 9, 2026
An Israeli military court on Tuesday sentenced Palestinian journalist Mahmoud Fatafta to four years in prison on charges of so-called “incitement”, the Palestinian Journalists’ Syndicate said.
The syndicate condemned the sentence in a statement, calling it “a new chapter in the targeting of Palestinian journalists and a systematic attempt to silence voices and suppress freedom of opinion and expression”.
The Israeli army arrested Fatafta on 30 May 2024 while he was passing through the Container checkpoint northeast of Bethlehem in the southern occupied West Bank.
The syndicate said prosecuting journalists in Israeli military courts over their journalistic work or expression of their views was “a flagrant violation of international law and international humanitarian law”. It said the military justice system was being used to punish and intimidate journalists and prevent them from carrying out their professional duties.
It added that the sentence against Fatafta came as part of an ongoing Israeli policy of pursuing, arresting and prosecuting Palestinian journalists in an attempt to “hide the Palestinian narrative and silence voices reporting the truth about what is happening on the ground”.
The syndicate said “incitement” charges had become a broad pretext used by Israeli authorities to pursue journalists, activists and people expressing their views, in violation of the right to freedom of expression and journalistic work.
Iran, Russia, China Demand Guarantees Against Further Attacks on Iranian Nuclear Sites
Sputnik – 09.09.2026
MOSCOW – Iran, Russia and China have demanded guarantees against further attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities, Iran’s mission in Vienna said on Wednesday.
“China, Iran, and Russia, in a joint statement to the [IAEA] BoG [Board of Governors] today, condemned repeated attacks against Iran’s nuclear facilities under IAEA safeguards, together with continuing threats of further aggression. In this regard, effective assurances, in particular guarantees of the non-recurrence of such actions, are indispensable for further development of Iran’s cooperation with the Agency,” the mission wrote on X.
The prevailing security conditions have effectively made the normal implementation of IAEA safeguards in Iran impossible, the mission added.
The US and Israel struck a number of Iranian nuclear facilities during the conflict of June 2025. Iranian nuclear sites were also hit during the latest escalation that began in late February 2026. Tehran blamed the US for the strikes.
The IAEA Board of Governors began its regular session on Monday in Vienna. The session, which runs until September 11, will address issues related to the implementation of safeguards in Iran and developments surrounding Iran’s nuclear program.
Iran War Just Got Much Bigger / Matt Bracken & Lt Col Daniel Davis
Daniel Davis / Deep Dive – September 8, 2026
Israeli Army Closes Tulkarem Zakat Committee Headquarters
IMEMC | September 8, 2026
Israeli forces invaded and closed the Tulkarem Central Zakat Committee headquarters in the northwestern West Bank before dawn Tuesday. After the soldiers withdrew, Palestinians found the body of Gaza Strip resident As’ad Mleiha inside.
Media sources said several Palestinian workers from the Gaza Strip had been living in part of the facility since October 7, 2023. When a large contingent of Israeli soldiers invaded the building, the soldiers forced the workers to leave.
Soldiers then abducted an unspecified number of workers and transported them by military truck to an undisclosed location.
The sources added that the soldiers vandalized the contents of the headquarters and then posted a notice at the entrance alleging that the committee was “illegal,” “supports terrorism,” and had been shut down.
During the invasion, Israeli soldiers fired concussion grenades and tear gas canisters at journalists covering the events and chased several reporters in the surrounding area. No injuries were reported.
Following the army’s withdrawal, Civil Defense and Palestinian Red Crescent Society crews recovered As’ad Mleiha’s body from inside the committee headquarters.
Civil Defense and Palestinian Red Crescent Society crews transferred the body to a hospital. The circumstances surrounding Mleiha’s death and how his body came to be inside the building remain unknown.
No information has been released regarding the fate of the Gaza workers abducted by Israeli forces during the invasion.
The closure of the committee comes amid ongoing Israeli military assaults throughout the Tulkarem governorate.
The Tulkarem Central Zakat Committee is a charitable institution affiliated with the Palestinian Ministry of Endowments and Religious Affairs.
The committee uses donations and zakat funds to provide humanitarian, social, educational, and financial assistance to families in need, orphans, and other vulnerable groups.
Once a refuge for Palestinians from Gaza stranded in the occupied West Bank after the since October 2023, the Tulkarm Central Zakat Committee headquarters has now become the scene of an Israeli military operation.
The development highlights the vulnerability of Gaza residents living in the West Bank, where ongoing Israeli invasions and abductions continue to expose them to heightened security and legal risks.
Blaming the Victim in the Gaza Genocide
Amnesty International blames the victim in a time of genocide
By Paul de Rooij • Unz Review • September 8, 2026
The late Dr. Israel Shahak once related that during WWII when a collaborator at the Warsaw ghetto was eliminated, the jubilant inmates (himself included) danced with joy.[0] Maybe the extreme situation didn’t permit the semblance of a legal process, but natural law ran its course. Now imagine if at that time a sanctimonious body were to pop up and chastise the inmates for this “crime”. Under the circumstances, it would appear hypocritical for anyone to criticise the inmates, let alone refer to their action as “unlawful” and demand “accountability”.
Well, Amnesty International just published an article that fits that description in a contemporary setting. It just published a news release, “Hamas must stamp out extrajudicial executions…”[1], which is an indictment of the execution or beatings of collaborators in Gaza. Amnesty’s rumination amounts to blaming the victim.
About Collaborators
For many decades Israel sought to recruit Palestinian collaborators. These were used as an enforcement arm of the oppressor; to inform on the Palestinian society and the resistance; to undermine the cohesion of the society, to sow distrust; act as propaganda agents; and to create dependence on the oppressor. The Israeli desire to destroy the Palestinian society has been ever present.
From the early days prior to the formation of Israel, zionists sought informers and traitors. Bedouins and the “peace bands” acted as trackers to find and eliminate Palestinian fighters. Wealthy Palestinians sold land or acted as agents for the zionists to acquire land. There are gradations of collaboration — from the ones who were involved in violence against their own people, to those engaged in acts that undermined Palestinian society[2].
Today the so-called Palestinian Authority (PA) are collaborators in the Israeli project; they suppress Palestinian resistance, maintain dependence and subjugation, and protect the network of Palestinian collaborators created by Israel. Prominent Palestinians opposed to Israeli oppression have been murdered by the PA; the PA goons have been tasked with suppressing resistance in key areas such as Jenin and Nablus; and PA forces coordinate their actions with Israeli forces.
Israeli prisons use collaborators (aka Asafir) placed in cells together with Palestinian prisoners to get them to divulge information. Asafir collaborators are also used to break the solidarity between prisoners; any activity that might create a spirit of resistance is broken up.
Notorious armed collaborators roam in the West Bank where they harass and intimidate victims at the behest of their handlers. But to create a culture subservient to the Israeli occupation, Palestinians are told to petition the collaborators to obtain permits, access to land or work. The collaborators simply do Israel’s dirty work.
Drug dealing and collaboration go hand in hand. There is a history of Israel supplying drugs and fostering the criminal gangs in Gaza and the West Bank.[3]
Yet another true and tested way to undermine a society. Drug dealers also act as armed enforcers.
It is fairly easy for Israelis to recruit collaborators. Any Palestinian who has to cross a checkpoint is easy prey for Israeli agents to coerce or bribe victims to become collaborators. No cooperation results in blocked access, and thus no work and the like. If a child requires to go to an Israeli hospital or a health facility in Jerusalem, the parents are often confronted with the choice of obtaining a permit by collaborating, or being turned back. Students seeking to go to study abroad are also put in the same quandary, collaborate or have passage denied. There is an upside to collaborating (obtaining access or favours), and the downside is minimal because collaborators aren’t persecuted. So, now there are collaborators everywhere in the West Bank.
Collaborators in Gaza
When Hamas took over Gaza after it won the elections in 2006, it displaced the collaborationist Palestinian Authority. But most of the ejected members of the PA forces, predominantly Fatah members, remained in Gaza and many were willing to collaborate with Israel. The Palestinian resistance has to contend with collaborators who would pinpoint tunnels, weapons or key personnel. Several resistance commanders were likely killed when exposed by collaborators. Hooded collaborators enable the Israeli military to identify and separate Palestinian prisoners who are either in or assist the resistance.
Some collaborators were tasked with spreading false rumours in crowded places. A favourite tactic was for a collaborator to take a shared taxi ride, and then loudly claim that a given official was corrupt or criminal. Others were instructed to paint defeatist or hateful graffiti.
And at present Israel is arming and organising Palestinian criminal gangs to terrorise neighbourhoods to drive people out of their homes. The Middle East Eye reports:[4]
Based on testimony from Israeli soldiers, UN reports and satellite imagery, the investigation found that increasingly well-armed collaborator militias have expelled Palestinians from their homes and carried out operations across Gaza. Israel has trained at least five militia groups, and potentially a sixth, operating from heavily fortified bases inside Israeli-occupied areas of the enclave.
One Israeli soldier described how the state, army and Shin Bet intelligence service send armed and “trained militias to commit war crimes, …”.
One can well understand Palestinian anger against the collaborators’ treasonous and criminal behaviour, and their attempts to poison Palestinian society.
Amnesty on rough justice
Although Israel is responsible for recruiting and exploiting a collaborator network, Amnesty portrays Hamas’ rough justice as “unlawful” and it calls for Hamas to be held accountable. It doesn’t portray the collaborators as an Israeli instrument.
Amnesty portrays the issue of collaborators as one between the Palestinian population at large and Hamas; not as one where Israel is the oppressor, and the Palestinians are the oppressed. And under the circumstances (Amnesty plainly admits there is “a collapse of law and order in Gaza”), how are Palestinians supposed to dispense justice? On the one hand Amnesty wants Hamas to operate under a legal framework, yet it plainly downplays the Israeli violations of most laws that should confer all Palestinians some protection. It is a clear double standard.
Israeli forces have targeted the police and courts. On day one of the 2014 attack, dozens of police were bombed and killed. In the recent past, police have been similarly targeted. So, it seems that Amnesty expects Hamas to operate within a legal framework meant to mediate societal tension in a state of peace. When Hamas establishes that organised crime in Gaza operates in tandem with Israeli forces, then it has the right to defend itself. Amnesty may not like the rough justice this entails, but it has no standing to criticise the way Palestinians defend themselves.
Erika Guevara Rosas, the author of the “Hamas must stamp out extrajudicial executions” article, seems to dismiss the accusations made by Hamas against collaborators. When referring to the collaborators, the article is sprinkled with the usual Amnesty weasel words: “suspected”, “alleged”. The word informant is put in quotation marks. Amnesty confers no credibility to statements made by Hamas. One wonders why Palestinians should be required to justify their actions when Israel carries on with impunity.
A legal argument
Anyone hiring a hitman for an assassination or any serious crime would face severe legal consequences. In the same manner, when Israel hires or coerces collaborators to perpetrate serious crimes, e.g., murder, then the contracting party should also bear severe legal consequences. Alas, this is not an argument that Amnesty understands.
There is a pattern
Most articles/news releases published by Amnesty seem to follow a pattern. One article will criticise Palestinians, and it is shortly thereafter followed by an article which criticises Israel. In the current context, we have the article about execution of collaborators, and it was followed a few days later by an article restating that Israel has done nothing to end the genocide and to abide by the ICJ’s ruling.[5] Amnesty seeks to portray itself as a neutral organisation which sits on the fence criticising “both sides”. Amnesty’s actions are neither proportional to the violence or injustice of the current situation. The reason it takes this dubious stance is because it doesn’t want to be in solidarity with the Palestinians, but it similarly doesn’t want to be antagonistic towards Israelis. The actions of the oppressed and oppressor are held to the same ahistorical standard.
Amnesty and genocide
It took a long time for Amnesty to unequivocally refer to Israeli crimes as genocide. On 28 October 2023, Craig Mokhiber, the former UN official in the High Commission for Human Rights, resigned because his agency was not reacting given the unfolding situation in Gaza, and stated in his resignation letter: “this is a textbook case of genocide”. It was only 13 months later that Amnesty acknowledged the nature of Israeli crimes, thus Amnesty was rather late to announce that Palestinians were subject to a genocidal campaign.[6] But then one would expect more action from “the leading human rights organisation”. Currently, several weeks transpire before it cursorily mentions genocide. It seems that Amnesty’s actions aren’t proportional to the severity of the crime — and to boot, Amnesty will regularly chastise Palestinians for the way they deal with collaborators or protestors.
A matter of timing
There are many egregious cases of Israeli violence or threats to perpetrate heinous acts. On 15 August 2026, Itamar Ben Gvir, the Israeli security minister, stated that he sought to kill 30 to 40 Palestinians every day. The man interviewing him helpfully volunteered to kill with his own bare hands. This is only Ben Gvir’s latest statement about an intent to kill many Palestinians, and he certainly belongs in the same dock as Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant to answer for all their mass crimes. Amnesty’s article chastising Palestinians for the assassination of collaborators coincided with Ben Gvir’s statements about criminal intent. What is worse, the elimination of collaborators or the threat to kill 30 to 40 Palestinians every day? What is surprising is that Amnesty didn’t utter a peep about Ben Gvir’s threats — hardly empty threats.
Human rights are for the birds
Human rights organisations think that they can opine on everything, and they believe that they can offer recommendations to everybody. Alas, the human rights framework is problematic and deficient, and human rights organisations are mostly compromised and propaganda tools for those who pay for them.
When confronted with mass crimes what is needed is justice, and not one of its bastardised, neutered, malleable and ineffective substitutes. If one wants justice then it behooves one to speak in terms of justice, and to avoid the human rights mumbo jumbo. When faced with mass crimes one should demand justice, and not merely seek some bandages. This is specially the case when human rights have been cynically exploited and weaponised by the US and UK. A framework that can be used to justify wars, the so-called humanitarian interventions (even humanitarian bombing!!), cannot be a framework that advances justice or motivates people to act against mass crimes.
Most human rights NGOs don’t even condemn the forever wars, the US/Israeli wars of aggression. Amnesty International is “not an anti-war organisation”.[7] How one can favour human rights and not oppose wars is a mystery. But then Amnesty is against capital punishment, but not opposed to some killing by the military. However, all killings by the Palestinian resistance are condemned or criticised in Amnesty’s weasel-like inimitable style. The same demands don’t apply when Israel bombs refugee camps, or hires, arms and organises collaborators to terrorise and expel the residents of the refugee camps. Here another standard applies.
Amnesty International is not part of the solution; it is part of the problem.
Notes
[0] Frank Collins, “Why Palestinians Kill Palestinians in Israeli-Occupied Territories”, WRMEA, Nov. 1989.https://www.wrmea.org/1989-november/why-palestinians-kill-palestinians-in-israeli-occupied-territories.html
[1] “Palestine: Hamas must stamp out extrajudicial executions and ensure justice for victims”, 21 August 2026.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2026/08/palestine-hamas-must-stamp-out-extrajudicial-executions-and-ensure-justice-for-victims/
[2] A good overview of early Palestinian collaboration see: Joseph Massad , “Palestinian elites have been collaborating against the resistance for a century”, 12 June 2026.
[3] Here is a recent example: Joe Glenton, Israel is smuggling narcotics into Gaza, Palestinian tribal council warns, The Canary, 17 December 2025.
https://www.thecanary.co/global/world-analysis/2025/12/17/israel-narcotics/
[4] Israel arms drug dealers to commit new ‘Sabra and Shatila’ in Gaza, MEE Staff, MEE, 27 August 2026.
See also: Palestine Information Center, “Agent militias in Gaza: Temporary occupation tool or project to reshape society”, 3 September 2026.
https://english.palinfo.com/reports/2026/09/03/369484/
[5] “Israel/OPT: South Africa ICJ submission must spur states to press Israel to end its genocide in Gaza”, Amnesty International, 1 September 2026.
[6] Amnesty International investigation concludes Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, Amnesty International, 5 December 2024.
[7] Personal communication with Donatella Rovera, an Amnesty researcher, January 2003.
It’s OK to fight for a foreign army (as long as they’re our friends)
That’s the unwritten rule for Britain’s media
By DES FREEDMAN | Declassified UK | September 2, 2026
The death of a British national, Bradley Townsend, killed in Ukraine in June while fighting for Russian forces has been widely reported in the media.
“British traitor who joined Vladimir Putin’s army ‘killed by Ukraine drone’” splashed the Daily Star while former security minister Tom Tugendhat told LBC that Townsend was “extremely misguided” for “engaging in an army that is committing the most barbarous war crimes that the world has seen in decades.”
Compare this to the far more positive coverage in the media of individual British nationals who have served in the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) during a genocide that has killed more than 70,000 Palestinians.
When Declassified, for example, revealed exclusively that more than 2,000 British subjects had joined the IDF since October 7, the only reference to this in the mainstream media was a short article in The London Standard.
There are, however, no stories describing British nationals as ‘traitors’ for joining the IDF, nor ministerial condemnations of subjects taking part in what the United Nations has described as “war crimes” and “crimes against humanity”.
On the contrary, British subjects enlisting in the IDF are routinely humanised and their justifications reported without criticism.
A Times story in October 2023, headlined “Meet the Britons defending ‘the only place Jews feel safe’”, described IDF soldier Sam Sank as a Tottenham fan and dog owner while also referring to another dual national, Joe, as a “Chelsea fan… camping out with an emergency supply of PG Tips tea.”
BBC News interviewed British-Israeli soldier Alex Moeller on 17 November 2023 drawing on his experience in an ‘IDF anti-terror unit’.
Moeller spoke, without rebuttal, about how Israeli forces had committed to “minimise civilian casualties and obviously minimise humanitarian impact”.
He opposed a ceasefire, describing it simply as a ‘tactical’ ploy by Hamas.
There was a marked distinction in the reporting of British nationals fighting for Russia, which is extremely negative, describing them as “thugs”, “yobs” and seriously misguided people.
For example, the Sun reported in November 2024 on Jay Fraser, the “Scots mercenary fighting for Vladimir Putin” while the Observer described him as a “university dropout” who was “captivated by ‘manly’ Russia”.
In March 2024, the Mirror reported on the “British traitors” fighting on the Russian side, Ben Stimson and his best friend Aidan Minnis, describing the latter as a “former National Front member and convicted thug.”
The article quotes former British army commander Colonel Richard Kemp: “These two are an absolute disgrace and are traitors who upon their return to the UK should be arrested and jailed.”
It then carries a Home Office statement saying that: “Any person who travels from the UK to conflict zones to engage in unlawful activity, should expect to be investigated upon their return.”
There are no stories that reveal similar threats being made against dual nationals fighting for the IDF other than a single reference on late-night BBC radio on 22 July 2025.
Defence journalist Tim Ripley suggested that the UK government could use a law to stop British citizens “commuting to the war in Gaza”.
The suggestion was not explored afterwards by any outlet.
Heroes in Ukraine
In contrast to the coverage of pro-Russian Britons, articles on British subjects fighting on the side of Ukraine have been far more positive.
The Sunday Times, for example, reported sympathetically about the case of ‘Baby’, a young Scot who signed up for Ukrainian forces but who, on his return from the frontline, was prevented from joining Police Scotland.
There was also blanket coverage in February 2025 – including on the BBC and Sky – of former Tory MP Jack Lopresti who joined Ukrainian forces after losing his seat in the 2024 general election.
This includes particularly sympathetic profiles in the Telegraph and Mail. The Guardian was equally positive in its account which highlighted Foreign Office advice that “it is illegal for British citizens to fight in Ukraine”.
Even though it was revealed in February 2026 that Lopresti had joined the neo-Nazi Azov Brigade, the Telegraph then carried a story the following month with the headline: “Jack Lopresti is a rare example of a politician who puts his money where his mouth is”.
The article was written by Colonel Richard Kemp, the same person who had called for the jailing of the two Britons fighting on the Russian side.
Mark Levin Trashes the Constitution to Protect Violent West Bank Settlers
By Kurt Nimmo | Another Day in the Empire | September 8, 2026
Mark Levin is at it again. He is livid over a decision by the UK government to ban trade with violent illegal settlers in the West Bank. Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband said this week the UK will ban imports of all goods from settlements in the occupied West Bank, in addition to services including financing, construction, infrastructure, real estate, and advertising for settlements.
For Levin and the Zionists in Israel and the United States, a boycott of Kahanist settlers is antisemitism, the same as public criticism of Israel over its slaughter of Palestinians, most of whom are women and children, is hatred of Jews.
Levin considers himself a constitutional lawyer. However, his interpretation of the US Constitution is highly selective. As an ardent and outspoken Zionist and defender of apartheid and genocide, he believes a boycott of Israel is not protected by the First Amendment. The right to boycott was reaffirmed in 1982 with a Supreme Court ruling on NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co. It held that nonviolent political boycotts are a form of protected speech. However, this is irrelevant when it comes to Israel.
The case centered around a civil-rights boycott of white-owned businesses in Mississippi. The Court upheld the right to peaceful advocacy, association, and political expression that were integral to the campaign.
In 2022, the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed Arkansas’ anti-boycott contracting legislation. The majority determined that the law governed commercial purchasing choices rather than safeguarding speech. In February 2023, the Supreme Court decided not to review an appeal.
However, court rulings in Texas, Arizona, and Arkansas have upheld the right to boycott as as a protected form of political expression under the First Amendment, challenging the legality of anti-BDS laws across the United States.
“Close to 40 states across the U.S. have laws that require ending contracts with and/or divesting from companies that engage in antisemitic boycotts, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) against Israel,” Levin posted to social media on September 7.
These states whose combined GDP is significant should publicly make clear to countries such as the UK that companies that engage in BDS because of their decisions will face consequences under state anti-BDS laws. By the way, Florida and Texas combined have a much larger GDP than the UK.
The Boycott, Divestment, and Sanction (BDS) movement is now illegal in 38 states. Congress has also considered anti-boycott legislation. In 2019, the Senate passed S.1, which contains anti-boycott provisions. In 2023, Republicans, including Marco Rubio, reintroduced the Combating BDS Act.
Most Americans oppose anti-BDS laws by a wide margin. 72% oppose laws penalizing people who boycott Israel while 22% supported such laws, according to the University of Maryland’s Critical Issues Poll.
Levin is not opposed to BDS if it focuses on the correct target. In 2021, for instance, he demanded a BDS-style boycott of big tech and major television networks in response to criticism of Israel. “He argues that the way to fight against distortions and false claims, and to counter the media censors, is take a page from the anti-Israel activists’ playbook,” reported the Jerusalem News Syndicate in 2021.
Does Levin disagree with the colonial protests against British goods in the 1760s and 1770s that led to the Boston Tea Party? Does he believe the Montgomery bus boycott in the mid-1950s was illegitimate? How about the United Farm Workers boycotts in the 1960s, or the NAACP Mississippi boycott of white-owned businesses, also in the 60s?
No, probably not. The only legitimate opposition to BDS concerns Israel. The Zionist state gets a pass and the Constitution is null and void when confronted with spurious accusations of antisemitism.
US ambassador threatens Britain with economic retaliation over Israeli settlement trade ban
The Cradle | September 8, 2026
US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee has said Washington will certainly hit back if Britain proceeds with trade sanctions targeting illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, telling BBC that a response could come from the federal government and from individual US states.
Huckabee said acting in this way against “a partner, Israel” risked a “huge economic impact on British businesses,” which he warned could find themselves “banned” from operating “in a number of states.”
He told BBC the planned ban on illegal Israeli settlement goods would be “discrimination against the Jewish people,” singling out Florida as a state that could move against British trade.
The ambassador had already accused the British government of “Jew hate” over the weekend, responding to criticism of Israel’s actions in Gaza by British Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband, who is himself Jewish.
Florida Republican Congressman Randy Fine issued a parallel threat, saying legislation he pushed through as a state lawmaker “would ban any British company forced to comply from doing business with any state or local government in Florida.”
Firms joining the boycott would also be shut out of the state if they needed permits or tax dealings with authorities to function, he said.
Israeli President Isaac Herzog, in a filmed statement, said Britain would land on “the wrong side of history,” calling the step “a grave miscalculation” and “a gross interference in the democratic elections of a sovereign nation.”
This comes after UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham moved to impose a full ban on trade with illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, along with possible sanctions on Israeli ministers and individual settlers.
Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar has publicly attacked British Foreign Secretary Miliband, calling his statement on the E1 settlement project patronizing.
The illegal E1 settlement bloc would cut the occupied West Bank in half, isolate it from occupied East Jerusalem, and bury any prospect of a Palestinian state, an outcome Israeli officials have stated as the goal.











