Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

FBI Breakup Ends SPLC and ADL Direct Influence

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | October 5, 2025

The FBI has officially ended its partnership with both the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), following years of mounting concern over the influence of partisan organizations in shaping federal intelligence and domestic “extremism” policy, which has resulted in online censorship.

FBI Director Kash Patel condemned the SPLC’s direction, describing it as a “partisan smear machine” and calling its involvement in federal intelligence work unacceptable.

He pointed specifically to the group’s so-called “hate map,” which has long been used to label mainstream conservative and Christian organizations as equivalent to violent hate groups.

“Their so-called hate map has been used to defame mainstream Americans and even inspired violence,” Patel stated. “That disgraceful record makes them unfit for any FBI partnership.”

The bureau confirmed it no longer shares information or maintains any intelligence products from the SPLC.

It has also cut off contact with the ADL, a group that, while ostensibly focused on combating antisemitism, has frequently advocated for censorship of speech it deems problematic, particularly online.

Both organizations were previously consulted by the FBI in identifying and monitoring alleged extremist threats.

That practice came under fire after the bureau’s Richmond office cited the SPLC in a controversial 2023 memo suggesting that traditional Catholics could be tied to radical activity.

The document called for agents to cultivate informants within Catholic churches.

The backlash led Patel to publicly reject the use of ideologically driven outside groups in FBI operations.

“I made it clear that the FBI will never rely on politicized or agenda-driven intelligence from outside groups—and certainly not from the SPLC,” Patel said. “All ties with the SPLC have officially been terminated.”

Originally known for battling white supremacist groups through litigation, the SPLC has since shifted its focus toward labeling conservative advocacy organizations as dangerous.

Over time, its “hate map” has become a blacklist used by corporations, financial services, and online platforms to restrict access and support for those groups.

More recently, the group listed Turning Point USA shortly before the assassination of its founder, free speech advocate Charlie Kirk.

The SPLC has maintained that not all Christian groups are included in its listings. For years, it pointed to Focus on the Family as an example of one that was not. That changed in 2024 when Focus was added to the map.

The ADL supported the STOP HATE Act, which seeks to pressure online platforms to remove “disinformation” and what it calls “hate speech.” The bill’s language raises obvious concerns about vague definitions and potential abuse.

Both organizations have held sway not just over federal agencies, but also over powerful private institutions.

AmazonEventbrite, Hyatt Hotels, and PayPal have all relied on the SPLC’s hate designations to determine which groups can use their services.

The now-discontinued AmazonSmile program excluded organizations listed by the SPLC, while major charitable foundations have blocked funding to those targeted by the group.

Federal agencies under the Biden administration have also shown a willingness to coordinate with the SPLC.

In a 2021 donor meeting, the group’s then-president said that many agencies had proactively reached out to solicit its input on shaping domestic terrorism policy.

That cooperation continued even after the SPLC labeled the parental rights group Moms for Liberty a hate group in 2023, followed by a briefing with the Department of Justice.

October 5, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Israel spending $4.1 million to brainwash US Christians with VR, geofencing campaigns

Press TV – October 5, 2025

Newly released FARA filings have revealed that the Israeli regime is paying up to $4.1 million to a US firm to develop a virtual reality (VR) program called the “October 7th Experience” aimed at brainwashing American Christians and targeting them through ‘geofencing’ propaganda ads at churches and colleges.

According to the FARA disclosures, the conservative activist Chad Schnitger’s new firm, Show Faith by Works, is set to receive more than $3.25 million from the Israeli regime over a period of five months, with an additional proposed budget of $835,000 for equipment and expansion.

The firm received an initial payment of approximately $326,000 on September 18, just days before officially registering as a foreign agent with the Department of Justice.

Show Faith by Works has detailed plans to engage pastors in pro-Israel op-ed writing, distribute ‘Pastoral Resource Packages’ by mail, employ social media influencers for “favorable coverage,” produce television-style commercials, conduct continuous geofenced digital ad campaigns at churches and campuses, and saturate social media with SEO-optimized anti-Palestinian messaging.

The firm will also tour a branded trailer exhibit to immerse audiences in narratives of Israel’s war with the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas through the ‘October 7th Experience’ program.

The “anti-Palestinian” section of the plan also includes assertions about Palestinian “complicity” in Hamas’s leadership, financing, and military operations, along with accusations of sheltering terrorists, hiding weapons in schools and hospitals, and celebrating the October 7 attack.

Furthermore, the materials emphasize that there has never been a Palestinian state, highlighting that Hamas’s goals are “genocidal” rather than “land-focused,” and criticizing the Palestinian choice of violence over modernization opportunities.

The filings also highlight a significant geofencing campaign targeting Christian churches on Sundays and Christian colleges on weekdays, aiming to deliver tailored pro-Israel content and sympathetic anti-Hamas messages to engaged audiences.

The campaign is designed to track individuals who enter the targeted zones and continue to deliver relevant content to them.

Geofencing is a digital marketing and surveillance technique that establishes a virtual boundary, or “fence,” around a specific physical location such as a church, college campus, or protest site.

When a person carrying a smartphone enters the geofenced area, their device can be identified and tagged using location services, mobile ad IDs, or app data.

Subsequently, targeted ads can be delivered to the individual while they are within the geofenced area, and their activities can be tracked and analyzed for further marketing purposes, often without the user’s awareness.

In addition, other recently disclosed FARA filings have exposed that the Israeli regime is paying 14-18 “influencers” with approximately $7,000 per post.

Additionally, the former Trump campaign manager, Brad Parscale, has reportedly been paid $6 million to promote a pro-Israel stance through platforms like ChatGPT and other LLMs.

October 5, 2025 Posted by | Deception | , , , | Leave a comment

International Committee for Breaking the Siege on Gaza chair responds to Israel defamation campaign

MEMO | October 4, 2025

Zahir Birawi, chair of the International Committee for Breaking the Siege on Gaza has today issued a press statement in response to an Israeli defamation campaign against international activists, solidarity organisations, and particularly those of us working to end the criminal siege of Gaza through the Freedom and Sumud flotillas.

Birawi says that his name has been cited in defamatory reports issued by Israeli ministries, notably on 30 September. “I state unequivocally: the allegations of terrorism levelled against me are false, fabricated, and politically motivated. They form part of a systematic strategy to criminalise peaceful solidarity work, intimidate international activists, and manufacture consent for Israel’s ongoing acts of piracy, including the kidnapping of hundreds of human rights defenders sailing to Gaza with humanitarian aid.”

The statement read: “Israel’s actions are not isolated but part of a state doctrine of defamation against those who challenge its apartheid and colonial rule. By branding activists as extremists, Israel attempts to neutralise opposition to its crimes, delegitimise solidarity networks, and shift attention away from its violations of international law.”

In light of the gravity of the allegations Birawi has asserted his right to pursue legal action against those responsible for the smear campaign. He wrote:

“I reserve my full right to pursue legal remedies against those who propagate these defamatory claims. This is not an empty threat. In 2021, I successfully sued World-Check, compelling the company to remove my name from its terrorism list and compensate me for the damage caused by its false classification. This legal precedent demonstrates both the falsity of these accusations and the accountability that can be demanded from those who spread them.”

October 5, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , | Leave a comment

Iran declares Cairo deal with IAEA ‘defunct’

The Cradle | October 5, 2025

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi confirmed on 5 October that the Cairo deal signed with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) last month is no longer active or valid due to European ‘snapback’ sanctions on Tehran.

“Experience has shown that there is no solution to Iran’s nuclear issue other than a diplomatic and negotiated one,” Araghchi said.

“The three European countries thought they could achieve results through the snapback mechanism, but that tool was ineffective and only made diplomacy more complicated. Diplomacy will always continue, but the form and the parties involved in negotiations have now changed. Undoubtedly, the role of the European countries in the upcoming talks has diminished, and their diplomatic justification for participating has weakened,” he added.

“In recent months, our discussions have been focused solely on the nuclear issue, conducted either directly or indirectly with the American side. In these exchanges, our proposals were completely transparent. Had they been taken seriously … reaching a negotiated and diplomatic solution would not have been out of reach. Even now, if the [opposing] parties act in good faith and consider mutual interests, the continuation of negotiations is possible.”

“Nevertheless, the situation following the military attack and the activation of the snapback mechanism has changed, and the upcoming negotiations will certainly be different from before,” he went on to say, adding that both the US-Israeli attacks on Iran in June and the activation of the ‘snapback’ mechanism have complicated matters.

“After several rounds of talks, this agreement was reached in Cairo. However, the Cairo Agreement no longer suffices under the new circumstances, including the activation of the snapback mechanism, and new decisions will be made.”

“To prove the peaceful nature of its nuclear program and its goodwill, the Islamic Republic of Iran has exhausted all diplomatic avenues, pursued consultations and cooperation, and presented constructive and balanced proposals. There is now no excuse left for Western countries to prevent Iran from cooperation or dialogue. Iran’s positions are fully legitimate and reasonable, and it is ready to pursue any solution that leads to confidence-building.”

The snapback sanctions took effect on 28 September. Washington welcomed the European decision.

Iran had previously warned that activating the sanctions would jeopardize the Cairo deal, reached on 9 September after Tehran resumed cooperation with the IAEA following a brief suspension as a result of the war.

Negotiations to prevent the return of the sanctions failed after the UN Security Council (UNSC) rejected a draft resolution to permanently lift sanctions against Iran. Russia, China, Pakistan, and Algeria voted to prevent the reintroduction of sanctions, while nine Security Council members voted against sanctions relief. Two countries abstained.

Tehran has recalled its envoys from Germany, France, and Italy.

The EU has continued to hold Iran to the terms of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), despite Washington’s unilateral withdrawal from the deal in 2018 and its policy of maximum pressure against Iran.

Tehran is insisting on its right to maintain peaceful uranium enrichment.

Nuclear talks between Tehran and Washington have been halted since the US-backed Israeli war against Iran started on 13 June.

The US was aware that Israel was set to attack while continuing to pretend it was negotiating with Iran. In late June, Washington joined the war with a bunker-buster attack on Iranian nuclear sites.

Israel has publicly threatened to restart the war against Iran. Tehran has vowed to respond more harshly to any new attack.

October 5, 2025 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Seyed M. Marandi: Peace Deal & Another War Against Iran

Glenn Diesen | October 5, 2025

I spoke with Seyed Mohammad Marandi in Sochi about the peace deal being imposed on Gaza, and the US/Israeli preparations for another war with Iran. Marandi is a professor at Tehran University and a former advisor to Iran’s Nuclear Negotiation Team.

Rumble

October 5, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Video | , , , , , | Leave a comment

The pirates of Israeli supremacy: The West’s favorite rogue state has done it again

By Tarik Cyril Amar | RT | October 2, 2025

The long-expected if perfectly criminal has happened again: Israel’s navy has intercepted the Gaza-bound Sumud Flotilla by force, stopping almost 50 boats and, in effect, kidnapping hundreds of their crews and passengers.

In terms of law – which, of course, are never really applied in practice to Israel – everything is exceedingly clear: The Sumud Flotilla was a volunteer operation to bring humanitarian aid to Gaza which has been subjected to Israeli genocide for now almost two years. Israel had a clear obligation to let that aid pass.

But then what to expect from the world’s most aggressive rogue state that is not “only” committing genocide, but also waging regional wars of aggression and running terrorist assassination campaigns in the face of the global public? And Israel has a well-established track-record of this kind of piracy, of course, having stopped several attempts to bring aid by sea since 2010, sometimes with casualties among the humanitarian activists.

Stopping the Sumud Flotilla wasn’t merely criminal but criminal in every regard lawyers can imagine, a typical Israeli super-whopper of legal nihilism: Israel attacked the flotilla ships in international waters where it has no jurisdiction. Even if the ships had gotten closer to the Gaza coast, they would, by the way, still not have been inside any Israeli territorial waters because there are no such waters off Gaza, over which Israel has no sovereignty as clearly confirmed by the International Court of Justice last year. What you find off the coast of Gaza, as a matter of fact, are Palestinian territorial waters.

The blockade of Gaza, which has lasted not “merely” for the duration of the current high-intensity genocide-ethnic cleansing campaign but for close to two decades now, is illegal. Because the blockade has been in place for so long, Israel is simply lying – surprise, surprise – when arguing it is a short-term measure covered by the San Remo rules, which summarize “International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea.” And even if those rules applied, under them as well Israel would have to let humanitarian aid through.

Finally, as Israel has attacked ships and citizens belonging to over 40 countries, Israel has committed aggression under international law against all of them and, less obvious but a fact, also crimes under each of these countries’ domestic laws, because they apply on those ships.

So far for the law, but then again, Israel is de facto outside and above the law. That much we have known for a long time. Indeed, Israel could not exist without constantly breaking international law and getting away with it. For Israel, lawlessness and impunity are not luxuries but vital necessities.

The reason why it has been able to exist in this manner is well-known, too: It is protected by the West and, in particular, the US. The latter is Israel’s single worst co-perpetrator, facilitating its crimes like no other state on Earth. Soon, for instance, the recent war of aggression waged by America and Israel together against Iran will probably be followed by a second, even worse assault.

In this regard, what has happened to the Sumud Flotilla has been a test: Clearly, recent moves by various Western governments, including the UK, France, and Australia to “recognize” – in an extremely dishonest manner – a Palestinian state and add some cautious rhetorical criticism of Israel make no difference to their absolute deference in practice to both Israel and its backers in the US.

What seemed like a glimmer of hope for a moment, the appearance of warships from various nations to apparently escort the humanitarian flotilla, has turned into just another humiliation: the escort abandoned their charges well in time to allow Israel a free hand.

The same Western leaders responsible for this cowardly retreat cannot stop waffling about the need not to “reward the aggressor,” when dialing up the war hysteria against Russia, as they have been doing mightily again recently, from mystery drones to declaring unconstitutional states of “not-peace” to chatter of states of emergency.

What about, for once, not rewarding the genocider for a change? But that’s hard, isn’t it? Once all Western governments are accomplices of Israel.

The Sumud Flotilla will not have been the last attempt to break both Israel’s genocidal blockade and its aura of impunity. There is hope, because even in NATO-EU Europe and the US ever more people understand what Israel really is and what it really does: a settler-colonial apartheid state that won’t stop committing genocide and ethnic cleansing. Israel’s systematic campaigns of propaganda and information war are escalating in response, as the case of TikTok has just demonstrated. But even Israel and its American friends cannot reverse history and an experience that the whole world has made. The Gaza Genocide is a fact already. It will not be forgotten. The resistance to Israel will never end.

Tarik Cyril Amar is a historian from Germany working at Koç University, Istanbul, on Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe, the history of World War II, the cultural Cold War, and the politics of memory.

October 5, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation, Progressive Hypocrite, Solidarity and Activism, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

Starmer government ‘not doing anything’ to help UK citizens kidnapped in international waters

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer at the ACC Liverpool Convention Centre in Liverpool, UK, on September 29, 2025. [Raşid Necati Aslım – Anadolu Agency]
MEMO | October 4, 2025

The families of the British citizens kidnapped by Israel in international waters this week as they sought to take humanitarian aid to Gaza as part of the Sumud Flotilla have drawn a blank in trying to get government assistance for their release. The Starmer government is “not doing anything” to help, it is alleged.

“Despite official statements claiming that families are being kept informed,” said Samir Asli, “it has now been more than 48 hours and we have still not received any substantial updates from the UK Foreign Office.” Asli’s wife is well-known journalist and activist Yvonne Ridley, a frequent contributor here at Middle East Monitor.

Yvonne was aboard the Omar Al Mokhtar, a humanitarian vessel participating in the peaceful mission to challenge the illegal blockade of Gaza and deliver symbolic aid to a population facing starvation, explained her husband. “On or around 2 October, the boat was intercepted by Israeli forces approximately 70 nautical miles off the coast of Gaza, in international waters, where Israel has no jurisdiction.”

Legal experts have confirmed that such an action constitutes a violation of international law. Indeed, former UK ambassador Craig Murray, who is also a former Head of the Maritime Section of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Alternate Head of the UK Delegation to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, has pointed out on social media that the flotilla was intercepted well beyond Israel’s 12-mile territorial waters.

“Moreover,” said Murray, “the Israeli maritime blockade has been in place for 17 years and is an intrinsic part of the long-term occupation found illegal in the International Court of Justice advisory opinion. It is, therefore, not a short-term measure in time of armed conflict as specified in the San Remo manual.” In any event, he added, the San Remo rules explicitly state that humanitarian supplies may not be blockaded. “The UN Commission of Inquiry has already determined that Israel is committing genocide, and the blockade is plainly a part of the machinery of such genocide. As such, the Israeli attack on the flotilla is plainly illegal.”

And yet, according to Samir Asli, a Foreign Office official told him that Yvonne’s actions were “illegal”. He obviously disputes this line. “This official’s job is to keep families informed and supported, not to judge Yvonne’s humanitarian work. Yvonne has always acted from a place of conscience, compassion and international law.”

The only response to their request for help from the family’s local Conservative MP, John Lamont, was a short message suggesting that the government might argue that, “Yvonne was travelling against current UK advice.”

At a time when a number of British citizens have been kidnapped in international waters, local MPs need to demand answers and action, not offer excuses, insisted Asli. “Yvonne and the other humanitarians on the flotilla were on a mission of conscience — to help starving children — and deserve the full support of their government.”

Such an inadequate response from the UK government appears to ignore the fact that, as Craig Murray noted, “On the High Seas, the law applying on each ship is the law of its flag state. An attack by a state military warship on a vessel on the High Seas is an attack on the flag state of the vessel attacked.” In other words, Israel has basically attacked the sovereignty of the states under whose flags the vessels were sailing. “Acts of illegal possession of vessels or abduction of crew on the High Seas should be pursued by each flag state as crimes within their domestic jurisdiction, not only in international law. As such, the Metropolitan Police and Director of Public Prosecutions have an obligation to investigate and act over the abduction of persons from UK-flagged vessels on the High Seas.”

The families of Yvonne Ridley and other British citizens being held unlawfully by Israel are calling upon friends, colleagues and supporters to contact their local MPs to insist that the Starmer government fulfils its responsibilities under British and international law to ensure the swift and safe return of their loved ones.

October 4, 2025 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes | , , , , | Leave a comment

Larry Ellison funded Rubio’s political rise after vetting him for ‘loyalty to Israel’

The Cradle | October 3, 2025

Larry Ellison, the billionaire co-founder of tech giant Oracle, vetted US Secretary of State Marco Rubio for his support of Israel before making large donations to the senator from Florida’s 2016 presidential election campaign, Drop Site news reported on 3 October.

Leaked emails released by an Iranian hacker group, Handala, show that Ellison discussed Rubio’s loyalty to Israel with Ron Prosor, who at that time served as the Israeli ambassador to the UN.

In April 2015, Ellison and Prosor exchanged several emails discussing Rubio and whether the senator would be an advocate for Israel.

After Ellison met Rubio for dinner, Prosor sent a message to Ellison asking how their meeting went.

“How was the conversation with Mario Rubio. [sic] Did he pass your scrutiny? Did you have a chance to talk about Israel? Would love to chat.”

Ellison responded by saying, “Hi Ron. Great meeting with Marco Rubio. I set him up to meet with Tony Blair,” adding, “Marco will be a great friend for Israel.”

At the time, Rubio was seen as a strong challenger in the Republican presidential primary, which was ultimately won by upstart candidate Donald Trump.

Ellison then donated $4 million to Rubio’s presidential campaign, making him among the top donors of the 2016 cycle.

Since that time, Rubio has been a staunch advocate for Israel and is currently helping Ellison in his goal of building a media empire and taking control of Gaza.

Drop Site notes Rubio has played a role in helping Ellison take control of TikTok, which Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu views as crucial to influencing young people in the US to support Israel.

While under Chinese ownership, TikTok allowed relatively free criticism of Israel’s genocide of Palestinians in Gaza.

Ellison is seeking to expand his influence over the traditional media in the US as well. His son David is moving to take control of CBS News, CNN, Warner Brothers, and Paramount, and will reportedly install pro-Israel journalist Bari Weiss as editor of CBS News.

Ellison is also seeking to benefit from post-war Gaza reconstruction through former UK prime minister Tony Blair and the institute he heads.

Blair is seeking to lead a committee that US President Donald Trump plans to establish to rule Gaza and oversee the reconstruction of the enclave once it has been emptied of its roughly 1.7 million Palestinian inhabitants.

Drop Site notes further that Trump’s son-in-law, New York real estate investor Jared Kushner, tasked the Tony Blair Institute this spring to develop a plan for post-war Gaza.

As Secretary of State, Rubio is in a position to influence the plans for Gaza and help determine who will benefit financially from Trump’s plan to build a high-tech city, the “Riviera of the Middle East,” on stolen Palestinian land.

If Blair is given the role of overseeing Gaza’s reconstruction, Ellison will have strong influence in the enclave. Drop Site observed that the “Tony Blair Institute has effectively become an offshoot of Oracle,” following donations of $350 million from Ellison.

Ellison has long been a supporter of Israel. At a 2014 fundraiser attended by other pro-Israel billionaires, he declared that “there is no greater honor” than supporting the Israeli military.

In 2017, Ellison donated over $16 million to the Friends of the IDF, the largest-ever donation to the organization. Ellison is also good friends with Prime Minister Netanyahu, who has been a guest at Ellison’s private island in Hawaii.

October 3, 2025 Posted by | Corruption, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , , | Leave a comment

New York Imposes Law Forcing Social Media to Justify Speech Policies to State Authorities

By Cindy Harper | Reclaim The Net | October 3, 2025

Social media companies operating in New York are now under fresh legal obligations as the state enforces the so-called “Stop Hiding Hate Act,” a new compelled speech law that forces platforms with annual revenues exceeding $100 million to hand over detailed reports on how they handle various forms of speech, including speech that is legally protected under the First Amendment.

The legislation went into effect on October 1 and has already triggered a constitutional showdown in court.

The law, officially Senate Bill S895B, demands biannual disclosures to the state Attorney General’s office.

These reports must outline how platforms define terms such as “hate speech,” “misinformation,” “harassment,” “disinformation,” and “extremism.”

Companies are also required to explain what moderation practices they apply to those categories and to provide specifics about actions taken against users and content.

Platforms that fail to comply face penalties of up to $15,000 per violation, per day. Injunctive action can also be taken against non-compliant entities.

Attorney General Letitia James declared that the law is about transparency and oversight.

“With violence and polarization on the rise, social media companies must ensure that their platforms don’t fuel hateful rhetoric and disinformation,” she said in a public statement, reinforcing her view that private companies should be accountable to the state for how they manage user expression.

“The Stop Hiding Hate Act requires social media companies to share their content moderation policies publicly and with my office to ensure that these companies are more transparent about how they are addressing harmful content on their platforms.”

Governor Kathy Hochul voiced similar sentiments, saying the legislation “builds on our efforts to improve safety online and marks an important step to increase transparency and accountability.”

The reporting rules, however, do not simply demand that companies disclose general moderation policies. They compel platforms to state clearly how they define some of the most politically charged and subjective categories of online content. These include terms that do not have universally accepted definitions and that often serve as the basis for viewpoint discrimination.

This government demand for compelled speech is at the heart of a legal battle now playing out in federal court.

In June 2025, X Corp., the company behind the X platform, filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the law.

The company’s complaint argues that Senate Bill S895B is a direct assault on editorial discretion and a violation of free speech rights enshrined in both the US and New York Constitutions.

According to the complaint, the law imposes “an impermissible attempt by the State to inject itself into the content-moderation editorial process.” X warns that the statute operates as a tool to pressure platforms into adopting government-favored positions on disputed topics.

Key to X’s legal objection is what it refers to as the “Content Category Report Provisions.” These provisions, the company argues, effectively force platforms to accept the state’s framing of controversial topics, including “foreign political interference” and “hate speech,” regardless of how a private entity might choose to treat or define such categories independently.

The lawsuit also highlights the heavy financial threat tied to non-compliance, noting that fines can reach $15,000 per day for every violation. In addition, platforms could face legal action from the Attorney General’s office.

In defending its position, X Corp. references a victory it recently secured in a separate First Amendment case involving a similar law in California. There, the Ninth Circuit ruled that forced reporting of this nature likely constitutes compelled non-commercial speech and does not hold up under strict scrutiny.

The court concluded that forcing platforms to adopt state-defined language “amounts to compelled speech,” a stance X Corp. is urging the Southern District of New York to follow.

The company’s lawsuit goes a step further, pointing to legislative bias as motivation for the law’s passage.

According to the complaint, New York lawmakers refused to engage with X’s representatives in the wake of the California ruling, explicitly citing their disapproval of Elon Musk’s public statements and use of the platform.

In correspondence included in the court filing, lawmakers dismissed the company’s concerns because, in their words, Musk had used X to promote content that “threatens the foundations of our democracy.”

That remark, X argues, reveals a plainly unconstitutional motive rooted in viewpoint discrimination. “The government cannot do indirectly what [it] is barred from doing directly,” the complaint states, referencing controlling Supreme Court precedent.

Despite the ongoing litigation, New York officials are moving forward with the law’s enforcement.

Senator Brad Hoylman-Sigal, one of the bill’s sponsors, defended the policy as a necessary countermeasure to what he described as real and potential violence driven by online speech. “The Stop Hiding Hate Act will ensure that New Yorkers are able to know what social media companies are doing (or not doing) to stop the spread of hatred and misinformation on their platforms,” he said.

The outcome of the lawsuit could have wide-reaching implications not only for companies operating in New York but also for how much power states can exert over online speech. For now, platforms face a stark choice: speak as the state demands or risk steep penalties for silence.

October 3, 2025 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance | , , , | Leave a comment

Recognise a state and prevent it from existing?

By José Goulão | Strategic Culture Foundation | October 2, 2025

And suddenly, the overwhelming majority of countries in the so-called Collective West decided to recognise the State of Palestine. Among them were some of the most loyal allies of the Zionist regime and accomplices to its atrocities, such as France, the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada and even, despite its negligible specific weight, the government of the Portuguese Republic. We know that consistency is not the strong point of the Montenegro clique: recognition was declared just a few weeks after the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Paulo Rangel, went to bless the crimes of the Israeli regime, precisely at one of the most intense stages of human and physical devastation in the Gaza Strip.

Any reader will naturally wonder what has now led so many important countries, the guardians of “our civilisation”, to adopt a stance that they could, and should, have taken years ago. Was it the blatant and dramatic exposure of the decades-old genocide of the Palestinian people, which is ravaging the Gaza Strip and which the hypocrisy of fine words and the most beautiful intentions can no longer hide? Perhaps a little, although we should not attach too much importance to this response because shame is not something that abounds in Western governments.

Another reason, this one with a much more important political and strategic significance, is the certainty of all those making the declarations that their decision, apart from being couched in plenty of half-truths, has no practical effect on the real recognition of Palestinian rights and on the murderous conduct of the State of Israel. On the same days that the declarations of recognition were made, the Zionist Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, assured with complete conviction that there would never be a Palestinian state. This was a challenge to the attitudes of Western countries, which they received with the most devout silence.

And now?

The most relevant situation, and also the one that raises the most doubts about the genuineness of Western governments’ intentions regarding the restoration of the rights of the Palestinian people, is based on a simple question: What now?

Yes, what could these declarations of recognition of the State of Palestine change in the current situation, controlled by the fascist impulses of the Israeli government and the US administration, this time under Trump’s baton – as it could be, with the same effects, under Biden’s orders?

At first glance, they will change nothing. Colonial and expansionist arbitrariness continues unabated in East Jerusalem and from north to south in the West Bank, while the human and physical levelling of Gaza continues unhindered, except for the guerrilla pockets of Hamas.

Western governments have recognised an abstract state with no effective powers over what should be its territory, disappearing every day in the face of the genocidal advances of hordes of settlers imported from all over the planet. Are Western governments doing anything concrete to force Israel to stop colonisation? Are they stopping sending weapons to Israel? Are they considering imposing sanctions capable of suffocating a state run by a criminal clique that is incapable of living on its own?

So far, there is no indication that any of the Western powers are willing to take these steps, which are essential if any qualitative changes in the balance of power throughout Palestine are to lead to negotiations capable of defining the paths for establishing and applying international law in the region. This would imply that, at least in this case, Western leaders would have to put aside their bureaucratic adherence to the ‘rules-based international order’ defined in Washington. The truth is that no government seems willing to take this risk, which, in practice and under these conditions, reveals that recognising or not recognising the State of Palestine will amount to the same thing, that is, more of the same.

Recognise, yes, but…

Western governments have been careful (which opens the door to backtracking) not to recognise the State of Palestine unconditionally, thus continuing to put the strict application of the principles established by international law on hold. Endowed with authority and power granted by five centuries of colonial violence, which allowed them to invent an entity such as the State of Israel, Western governments have attached a series of conditions to the decision. Taken literally, these translate into recognition without recognition because they effectively limit the Palestinian people’s decision-making powers on matters that concern them and on which only they have the right to deliberate.

In a manoeuvre that transfigures much of what is positive about recognition, Western governments are attempting to breathe new life into Mahmoud Abbas’s moribund Palestinian Authority, confined to Ramallah, by giving it powers that it will be unable to exercise. They also demand its absolute surrender to Israel – a demand that is unnecessary in the situation that has been dragging on throughout this century – and they attribute sole responsibility for terrorism in Palestine to Hamas, while ignoring Israeli terror – disguised as ‘security’ and ‘right to exist’. As always, this double standard vitiates the very declarations of recognition from the outset.

The condition that demonstrates how hypocritical and, for now, useless the declarations of recognition are, however, relates to the demand for the disarmament not only of Hamas but of all structures of the Palestinian Resistance. Such demands leave the entire Palestinian people even more helpless and at the mercy of the criminal free will of the Zionist regime, which can thus pursue its genocidal goal, free from any hindrance, while remaining exempt from accountability before international bodies. In the practical consequences of the measures imposed by Western governments in exchange for the recognition of the State of Palestine, the Zionist state would find the best of all worlds and the full realisation of all its objectives.

The shadow of collaborationism

The most recent developments in the recognition process help to dispel some uncertainties about the interests that lie behind the decision, which are not favourable to the Palestinian people.

It was clear from the outset that the recognition of Palestinian independence by Western governments was not, it bears repeating, unconditional. Most of the speeches on the subject clearly overvalued the Palestinian Authority, which is inactive in practice and, more seriously, entirely conditioned by Israel’s demands. The “shared” management of much of the West Bank between the Ramallah government and the Zionist occupation forces means, in fact, that the former has been placed at the service of the latter’s interests. This is often confirmed by the actions of the Palestinian police forces in repressive actions against the Palestinian population itself.

This situation suits Western governments because it means that the ‘autonomous’ authorities are willing to collaborate in ways that run counter to the legitimate interests of the Palestinian people, which have never been recognised by Western states.

At the same time, the West attributes sole representation of the Palestinians to the decrepit Palestinian Authority and its leader Mahmoud Abbas, who is in fact perpetuated in power despite being completely hamstrung by Israel and the United States. It should be remembered, as it is a fact, that his accession to the presidency was achieved through a soft coup organised in 1994 by the United States, Israel and Western powers, as a result of which the historic leader of the Resistance, Yasser Arafat, was removed from the main positions of power (to which he had been elected) and assassinated a few months later.

It should also be remembered that Mahmoud Abbas, very recently described as ‘pragmatic’ by a pro-Israeli publication such as the weekly newspaper Expresso, was received at the White House, from where Arafat had been banned, shortly after taking office as president of the so-called ‘Autonomy’ in 1994.

These circumstances help to better understand the Western constraints that accompanied the recognition of independence. And they lead to the elementary conclusion that there will be no representative entity that reflects the will of the Palestinian people without the holding of free, open and democratic general elections under the control of international bodies supervised by the UN. This process cannot involve the intervention of Israel and the United States of America, which is by definition biased and self-serving.

Another demand common to Western governments is that the Resistance (wrongly and maliciously equated with Hamas) should ‘renounce’ terrorism, that is, armed struggle, while, it should be repeated, sparing Israeli terrorism. This ‘renunciation’ must be accompanied by the disarmament of the Resistance, which means the total surrender of the Palestinian people to the discretionary and genocidal power of Israel. From this perspective, the recognition of Palestine becomes a poisoned gift.

Abbas’ recent speech to the UN General Assembly, delivered via the internet because, this time, the Trump administration illegally refused to grant the Palestinian president a visa to travel to New York, confirmed the existence of dangerous collaboration with Israeli and Western colonial interests.

Mahmoud Abbas, as Palestinian president, promised that ‘Hamas will never be the government’. But how can the most prominent Palestinian leader, whose party was defeated in the last general elections held in the occupied territories, promise that the most voted political force (according to the last poll, held more than 15 years ago) will not be able to govern the state? By manipulating the election results? By adopting a single-party regime or a personal dictatorship? By preventing a party with significant popular support, Hamas or any other, from being a legitimate and necessary part of a majority government? Let us remember that Abbas and his Western and Arab allies prevented Hamas from governing after it won an absolute majority in free elections; and that, despite multiple negotiations and supposed draft agreements, they always sabotaged the creation of ‘national unity governments’ that would have brought Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem under the same ‘autonomous government’. ‘One of our strategic objectives is to maintain the separation between Gaza and the West Bank,’ Netanyahu confessed to his Likud party’s parliamentary group.

None of these paths implied in the content of the recognition statements correspond to the ‘democratic values’ proclaimed by the Western world, which seems willing to impose, through its latest decision, an authoritarian and undemocratic ‘solution’ centred on Abbas.

In his speech, the Palestinian president stated that he does not want Palestine to be ‘an armed state’. What does this idea mean, which is incompatible with the existence of a full state as established in international law? Would the defence and security of Palestine be handed over to Israel? Would the Palestinian people no longer have anyone to defend them, whether it be the armed resistance or the state apparatus?

In his time, shortly before being assassinated by Zionism in 1995, Israeli Prime Minister Isaac Rabin admitted that the maximum status he would grant to a Palestinian entity at the end of the ‘peace process’ would be ‘less than a state’. Have Mahmoud Abbas and the Western leaders who manipulate him revived this idea? Will Palestine ‘less than a state’ be the future state of Palestine as understood?  There will be no better way, then, already considered as the ‘final solution’ to the problem, for the continuation of genocide and the creation of Greater Israel – throughout Palestine, as a first step.

The fundamental question, however, remains: what will come after the recognition of independence, given that Israel occupies almost the entire territory where this state would be created? What will Western countries do to give substance to their decision? It should be remembered that international law requires the creation of an ‘independent and viable’ Palestinian state. In prosaic terms, a state like any other. However, this is not what is being planned, with the collaboration of the incompetent Palestinian Authority. Israel’s dizzying policy of creating settlements is gradually eating away at the territory that is essential for the creation of a viable state. Taking a clear-headed view, the Portuguese head of state admitted that one day there will be no territory left to establish a state. This is a reality that I began denouncing many years ago, because it is obvious and Israel makes no secret of it. Despite recognising these circumstances, the Western world is doing nothing concrete to stop the colonisation and make the state it claims to recognise viable.

Once again, the West’s main objective has been to create propaganda and delaying tactics and, with them, to try to neutralise the increasingly strong, active and genuine solidarity of Western peoples with the Palestinian people. This solidarity cannot be allowed to wane; it must be strengthened, because if we rely on the promises and decisions of our governments, the Palestinian people will continue to be the biggest victims. And we cannot allow that to happen.

October 3, 2025 Posted by | Deception, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Progressive Hypocrite | , , , , | Leave a comment