Tag: israel

Israeli authorities arrest 20-year-old American citizen in Jerusalem on suspicion of conducting espionage missions for Iranian intelligence

In a major joint counterintelligence operation, the Israel Police and the Shin Bet security agency announced the arrest of a 20-year-old American citizen residing in the Jerusalem area on suspicion of conducting espionage missions for Iranian intelligence.

The suspect, whose identity remains withheld under court-authorized restrictions, was taken into custody following critical intelligence provided by a number of undisclosed security agencies.

A prosecutor’s statement was formally filed in court, a mandatory legal precursor signaling that a formal indictment and a request to hold the individual without bail until the conclusion of legal proceedings will be submitted.

According to security officials, the investigation revealed that the suspect had been actively maintaining contact with operatives acting on behalf of Iranian intelligence agencies over the course of several months.

During this period, the American reportedly accepted and executed numerous assignments that primarily involved documenting and photographing sensitive strategic sites across Israel. In exchange for the surveillance data and media, the suspect allegedly received financial compensation “ranging from dozens to hundreds of U.S. dollars per completed task.”

The arrest comes amid a sharp spike in Iranian-directed espionage operations inside Israel, which have increasingly relied on recruiting local residents and foreign nationals through digital platforms.

Chief Inspector Amichai Panta, an investigations officer with the Jerusalem District’s Major Crimes Unit, emphasized the gravity of the case, noting that multiple espionage operations have been dismantled recently, with some suspects operating directly during active wartime to aid hostile foreign plots.

Keep reading

Americans Want Peace, Israel Wants War

America wants peace. Israel wants war. The great majority of Americans want an end to the war against Iran. The great majority in Congress just want more contributions from the Israel Lobby and its supporters.

Now, most members of Congress are really squirming. They know that most of their constituents are fed up with foreign wars and want this stupid war in Iran over, the sooner the better.

But they are afraid to criticize Israel’s war for fear of the Israel Lobby steering big campaign contributions against them. Their silence is deafening.

Most members are trying to keep quiet. Almost no one other than Mark Levin, Ben Shapiro, and the Israel First crowd are enthusiastic about this war.

The only ones speaking out strongly in favor of it are members who have received and/or who hope to receive millions in campaign contributions from the Lobby like Senators Ted Cruz, Lindsay Graham, Tom Cotton and others.

They didn’t even criticize Israel when it was starving and killing more than 20,000 children in Gaza. Congress would have rushed to pass a resolution of condemnation if it had been done in any other country than Israel.

But the killing goes on, even during so-called ceasefires. Thousands have been killed over this past year by Israeli forces in Gaza, Lebanon, and Iran.

We don’t hear and see as much about all this killing because Israel was losing the public relations battle, and pro-Israel billionaires bought up significant parts of the national media that they did not already own.  Lesser-known conservative “influencers” and podcasters were given money, and 1,000 ministers were given free trips to Israel. Even TikTok was bought because its coverage was supposedly causing too many teenagers to have anti-Israel opinions.

However, all the pro-Israel propaganda has not worked so far. Even President Trump has apparently gotten angry at times with Netanyahu, telling him at one point that he shouldn’t blow up an entire apartment building to get at one person.

And Vice President Vance told the world in a press conference that Israel’s cabinet should realize that President Trump was the only world leader still supporting  Netanyahu and that two-thirds of all the military equipment and ammunition used by the IDF in these latest wars had been paid for by U.S. taxpayers.

The very few members of Congress and commentators who are criticizing President Trump for giving into Iran in the Memorandum he signed need to be asked what their alternative is.

Keep reading

Israel-Lebanon Deal On Life Support: Israel Won’t Withdraw, And Lebanon’s Christians Are Split On Whether It’s A Lifeline Or A Trap

The US-brokered “Trilateral Framework” signed in Washington on June 26 — sold as a “first step toward peace” — is fraying within days. The 14-point deal ties any Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon to the “verified disarmament of non-state armed groups,” a plain reference to Hezbollah. A now-public security annex states: further IDF pullbacks are conditioned on “results, not time” — on “successful completion of agreed upon and verifiable disarmament,” with no withdrawal timeline at all. Israel can therefore stay indefinitely and call it legal.

Netanyahu, visiting troops in the self-declared “security zone” alongside Defense Minister Israel Katz, said Israel “will not leave southern Lebanon until the threat has disappeared”; Katz added they “will not withdraw a millimeter” until Hezbollah is disarmed. Since disarmament is the precondition for a withdrawal Israel refuses to start, the sequencing seems circular by design. Israeli strikes have continued across the south, the Bekaa, and Beirut’s southern suburbs. Hezbollah chief Naim Qassem branded the deal “null and void,” a “humiliation,” and vowed to keep fighting until Israel leaves — a rejection driven by the Iran-backed militia’s determination to keep its weapons and its war, not by any concern for the Lebanese state.

The Christian angle is where Western coverage flattens a real divide — and it’s worth getting right, because Israel has a documented history of cultivating Lebanese politicians.

On one side, Samir Geagea’s Lebanese Forces cheered the pact as “the most significant political step taken by the Lebanese state in half a century.” But Geagea is the most Israel-friendly voice in Lebanese politics — so his enthusiasm should be weighed accordingly, not taken as the Christian consensus.

The Free Patriotic Movement, Lebanon’s second largest Christian party, founded by former President Michel Aoun and led by Gebran Bassil, did not celebrate but seems open to finding a way forward. Bassil’s verdict: the agreement “is beneficial if we regain all our rights, and dangerous if it is a recipe for strife,” demanding “responsible engagement.” The party said it backs “a comprehensive and lasting peace” but that peace “cannot be achieved through surrendering to Israeli demands or sacrificing Lebanese rights,” warning the framework “lacks guarantees for Israeli withdrawal” and that its use of “redeployment” instead of withdrawal leaves “the door open for the continuation of the occupation.”

Keep reading

Chilling Report Finds Israel Deliberately Targeting Children As Genocide In Gaza Continues

Tension over Israel continues to grow within US political discourse. From both sides of the aisle, people’s attitudes towards the Zionist settler-colonial project are souring. Israel is the most disliked it has ever been, with a recent survey from the Pew Research Center finding that the majority of people across 36 countries hold unfavorable views of Israel and Netanyahu, with the number as high as 60% among Americans.

Support for Israeli war crimes continues to drive a rift between both parties. Just this week, opposition to Israel played a key role in the outcomes of New York’s congressional primaries, with anti-Zionist candidates receiving sweeping victories over candidates backed by establishment Democrats. Meanwhile, on the right, conservative firebrand Tucker Carlson officially announced he was leaving the Republican Party specifically due to its continued support for Israel.

These sentiments will likely only continue to grow in light of a new report recently released by the United Nations Human Rights Council’s Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory. From the very beginning, the report is unambiguous in its findings with the headline reading “the essence of childhood has been destroyed.” In it, the inquiry found conclusive evidence that Israeli forces have consistently and deliberately targeted children in Gaza, as well as the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and including within protected refugee camps, resulting in the death of at least 20,179 and injury of 44,143 since October 7th, 2023.

According to the report, among those killed, 5,031 were under the age of five, while more than 1,000 were under one year of age. Most disheartning, the inquiry found that approximately 420 of those killed were newborn babies.

The commission noted the actual number of child casualties is “certainly higher”, due to the amount of unaccounted child victims who are missing or buried under rubble, estimated to be roughly an additional 5,160.

The commission interviewed 17 medical professionals who had worked at hospitals across Gaza. Among them, one doctor attested that many of the injuries they documented were akin to “a game of target practice”, with Israeli snipers targeting different body parts of teenage boys on different days. With other doctors documenting similar acts of deliberate depravity.

Keep reading

The NDAA Proposed Merger of the US and Israeli Military Is Strategically Unwise and Inherently Unconstitutional

Prior to the American Revolution being fought on battlefields, it was fought as an argument about sovereignty.

Who decides the fate of a nation? Who commands its armies? Who determines when its citizens go to war and when they remain at peace?

The Founders answered those questions with remarkable clarity. In a republic, sovereignty belongs to the people and is exercised through constitutional institutions accountable to them. Section 219 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2027 threatens to undermine the foundational principles of our republic and our constitutional democracy.

Advocates for Section 219 describe it as a strategic partnership, a modernization of military cooperation between the United States and Israel. Yet the language of the provision reaches far beyond cooperation. It calls for the integration of military planning, intelligence sharing, technological development, procurement systems, research capabilities, and strategic operations in ways that blur the distinction between two sovereign nations.

This is not merely a policy question, it is a constitutional one.

America has alliances with many nations. We cooperate with allies. We conduct joint exercises. We share intelligence. However, there is a profound difference between cooperation and integration.

Cooperation preserves independent decision making.

Integration creates pressure toward shared decision making and shared consequences.

The Constitution was deliberately designed to prevent precisely this type of entanglement.

The President serves as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States. Congress possesses the authority to declare war. Together these provisions were meant to ensure that decisions involving American lives, American treasure, and American military power remain accountable to the American people.

Section 219 moves the nation in the opposite direction. It creates permanent structures through which military, intelligence, technological, and strategic functions become increasingly intertwined with those of another government. Even if no formal transfer of command occurs, the practical effect is to make American decision making dependent upon relationships and commitments that exist far beyond the reach of American voters.

Keep reading

American Liberals Silent as Hamas Crushes Anti-Hamas Protests

The “Free Palestine” movement has remained silent on the arrest, torture, and murder of anti-Hamas protesters in Palestine. The violence and repression committed by the Hamas terrorist organization against Palestinian civilians throw a wrinkle into its narrative blaming Israel and President Trump for all of the suffering in Gaza. The protests also dispel claims by the American left that Gazans want to be ruled by Hamas or that Hamas is the legitimate governing authority.

For the second time in little more than a year, Palestinians in Gaza took to the streets demanding an end to Hamas rule. According to the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research, Hamas’s approval rating fell from 52 percent in December 2023 to 43 percent by May 2025. The demonstrations, organized as the “June 26 Peaceful Revolution,” reflected growing anger over nearly two decades of Hamas control, the devastation of the war, and allegations of corruption and repression.

The protests were organized across 18 locations throughout the Gaza Strip. Demonstrators called on Hamas to disarm and transfer civil administration to a transitional governing authority.

Hamas responded with a sweeping crackdown. Security forces arrested organizers, kidnapped suspected participants, threatened demonstrators, and used mosques to denounce the protests before many rallies could begin. Armed operatives arrested Gazans in the streets, seized mobile phones, restricted movement around displaced persons camps, and rounded up others at hospitals.

Although the crackdown prevented large-scale demonstrations in many areas, hundreds of Palestinians defied the threats and publicly called for Hamas’s removal.

In the days preceding the protests, Hamas launched what activist Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib, a Gaza-born Palestinian now living in exile in the United States, described as an “industrial-scale campaign of terror, intimidation, interrogation, and blackmail” against thousands of Gazans who had planned to participate.

Keep reading

Epic Humiliation Ensues for Openly Gay Leftist California Democrat When He Shows Up at San Francisco’s Trans March 

One of the most loathsome leftist Democrats in America learned this week that nothing he has done will ever satisfy the most extreme people in America.

As Newsweek reported, a viral video emerged showing openly gay California State Senator Scott Wiener getting some very rough treatment while attending San Francisco’s Trans March on Friday.

The footage shows Wiener getting screamed at and mobbed by rallygoers. Loud profanities can be heard throughout the two-minute video as the attendees slam him as a Zionist and his position on Gaza.

“Your policy on the genocide in Gaza is terrible!” one man shouts at Wiener.

“We f**king hate you!” others scream. “You do not belong here!”

This treatment came despite the rallygoers’ own admission that Wiener, who is Jewish and running for Nancy Pelosi’s congressional seat, has stood in lockstep with them on advancing their sick agenda.

“You’ve done wonderful things for trans people, but not anymore!” the first man yells. “And it breaks my f**king heart!”

Keep reading

Congress Is Preparing To Surrender American Sovereignty on the Eve of America’s 250th Anniversary

The United States Congress, on the very eve of the 250th anniversary of our Declaration of Independence from Great Britain, is preparing to formally diminish American independence and sovereignty through a proposed merger and long-term integration of executive functions throughout the government, coordinated by the Department of Defense.

Treacherous provisions in the 2027 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) mandate that the U.S. State Department, the U.S. Commerce Department, and the heads of other relevant Federal departments and agencies cooperate with their Israeli counterparts for the purpose of consolidating U.S. and Israeli military activities in order to align efforts and avoid duplication.

The greatest threat to American sovereignty rarely arrives wearing the uniform of a foreign army. It often arrives through the complacency, expediency, or poor judgment of elected officials who fail to recognize the long-term consequences of the powers they surrender.

Whether motivated by political convenience, misplaced loyalty, or simple inattention, such actions can erode constitutional self-government just as surely as deliberate acts of betrayal.

No foreign nation, regardless of whether it is Israel, Britain, Canada, France, or Japan, should be integrated into permanent executive, military, technological, intelligence, and research structures in a manner that diminishes American sovereignty and democratic accountability.

The Pentagon’s Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) recently identified Israel as a counterintelligence threat.

Under ordinary circumstances, such a finding would prompt heightened scrutiny, caution, and congressional oversight. Instead, Congress has continued advancing provisions in the 2027 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that would deepen military, technological, and strategic integration between the United States and Israel.

The legislation specifies Israel-U.S. coordination with America’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), the Missile Defense Agency, including the Golden Dome initiative, the United States Space Command, directed energy programs, artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and other critical technologies that will shape the future distribution of power.

Of all the areas mentioned, artificial intelligence and biotechnology may have the greatest long term implications. These technologies will shape privacy, surveillance, predictive policing, digital identity systems, biosecurity, human enhancement technologies, and information control.

The Founders could never have imagined artificial intelligence, autonomous systems, or biotechnology directed by algorithms. Yet they understood a timeless truth: power must remain accountable to the people. The danger of our age is not merely that authority may concentrate in governments, corporations, or military institutions. It is that decisions of profound consequence may increasingly be delegated to technological systems that operate beyond the understanding and oversight of those whom the Constitution entrusts with governing.

Keep reading

How Facebook Has Censored My Account Over Criticism of Israel

Over the past few weeks, META’s censorship of my account has reduced my Reel Views by 68%, regular views by 27%, followers by 52%, and engagement by 21%.

I am by no means the greatest victim of META censorship, but I am in a position to document how and why they are censoring/limiting my reach on META platforms, all because of my objections to Israeli policies. This is a key reason as to why I am transitioning my work and output to Substack.This Substack is reader-supported. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

This is what happened.

A few weeks ago, I was notified by META that my account would be limited going forward. My account will still be visible – at least for now – but “people will have to scroll longer,” and it won’t be “suggested” to people who aren’t my friends.

According to META, this censorship is because they claim my profile’s “content is unoriginal” and that it “has some issues.” (?!)

Anyone who follows me on META knows that my content is either me posting my own interviews with various outlets (by definition, that is original), my own opeds and commentary (also original), or pictures of my Samoyeds (admittedly, credit here goes to my dogs).

META’s “rules” define “unoriginal” as content that already exists on Facebook if you had no meaningful role in creating it,” “compiling and posting videos from multiple pages,” or “posting videos that you didn’t film or produce.”

Again, my postings really don’t violate these rules. My analysis is original, and most of the videos I post are my own interviews.

But I think we are getting closer to the real problem. I think META’s problem is not the posting of my own interviews (which constitute the majority of my posts), but rather the videos I post from Gaza. The problem, of course, is not that these videos are not my original content – META couldn’t care less about that.

It’s because it is videos documenting Israeli war crimes. Videos that have prompted Israel’s standing among Americans to plummet. Videos that are causing pro-Israeli lawmakers to lose their primary elections. Videos that have been censored from mainstream media and now TikTok, but that have still circulated on social media, partly thanks to accounts like mine.

Indeed, when I dug deeper, the only justification META provided for their censorship was that they had removed two videos of graphic violence I had posted on July 16 and July 30, 2025. That is, a year ago. At the height of the Israeli genocide against the Palestinian people.

Keep reading

Netanyahu Cannot Have a Veto Over US Iran Diplomacy

On June 23, Israeli and Lebanese delegations began a new round of talks in Washington even as the U.S.-Iran memorandum entered its first serious test. The interim deal, signed on June 17, was meant to create 60 days of space for a final settlement: a halt in hostilities, a path toward safer navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, limited sanctions relief, and negotiations over the nuclear file. But the deal is now being tested by the very question it was supposed to contain. Can the United States pursue diplomacy with Iran while Israel insists that it must retain unrestricted freedom of military action in Lebanon?

That question should not be evaded. Israel has real security concerns about Iran’s nuclear capacity, its missile program, and the armed groups Tehran supports across the region. Israelis living near the Lebanese border have endured rocket fire and the threat of renewed war. A rushed agreement that merely freezes danger while leaving the machinery of escalation intact would not deserve American support. But serious security concerns do not create a right to veto another country’s diplomacy. They create a case for stronger verification, clearer consequences for violations, and more durable regional arrangements.

The June 17 memorandum is not a finished peace agreement. It is a fragile framework. Its text leaves the hardest questions for the next 60 days: the status of Iran’s enriched uranium, the future of enrichment, sanctions schedules, inspection arrangements, and the mechanisms that would enforce compliance. The United States has since issued a temporary sanctions waiver, while public statements from Washington and Tehran have already diverged over whether Iran agreed to long-term nuclear inspections. Those gaps are not a reason to abandon diplomacy. They are the reason diplomacy must be exacting.

This is where Netanyahu’s position matters. Israel is not a signatory to the U.S.-Iran memorandum, and it is entitled to press its case in Washington. Yet Netanyahu has repeatedly argued that Israeli forces must preserve freedom of action against Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, even as the ceasefire there remains part of the wider regional de-escalation effort. That posture turns a legitimate debate over security into something more consequential: an assertion that any agreement limiting Israeli military discretion is, by definition, unacceptable.

The distinction is not semantic. Israel can demand that a final agreement address missile threats, weapons transfers, Hezbollah’s arsenal, and enforceable nuclear restrictions. It can seek rapid intelligence-sharing, inspection standards, and clear American commitments if Iran violates a deal. What it should not demand is a regional order built around the premise that Washington must keep military escalation available whenever Israeli leaders decide diplomacy has become too constraining. A security strategy can seek tougher terms without requiring permanent crisis as its operating condition.

Keep reading