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

Israel continues to commit genocide by targeting children in Gaza, UN inquiry finds

Israel continues to commit genocide by deliberately targeting Palestinian children in Gaza, an ⁠independent UN inquiry has found.

The report by the UN independent international commission of inquiry examined violations against Palestinian children since the start of the war in Gaza, and said about 30% of the people killed by Israeli forces have been children.

A previous report by the commission in September found that Israel had committed genocide in Gaza and that Israeli officials, including the prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, incited these acts. Netanyahu is separately wanted by the international criminal court (ICC) for war crimes.

The Israeli mission in Geneva said Israel rejected the commission’s “libellous sham”. Israel has fought hard against allegations of genocide, while receiving critical diplomatic support from its allies, including the US and the UK.

A significant body of research by legal and rights experts has concluded that Israel is intent on destroying Palestinians, including analyses by UN investigators, rights bodies such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, and genocide scholars worldwide.

Genocide, which became a crime after the second world war and the Holocaust, is considered the most serious international crime.

Keep reading

Ritual child abuse and rape is a societal norm in ‘Israel’ according to latest investigation by Zionist media outlet

From religious ritualistic rape to the sadistic rape of Palestinian prisoners including children, this is a society drunk on violence, depravity and without any recognisable boundaries

18-month old Karim tortured by the Zionist forces in Gaza. Photo: Osama Al-Kahlout

In recent weeks, Zionist forces tortured an 18-month old child to force his father, who witnessed the abuse, to confess. The horrific event took place in Central Gaza, in the Al Maghazi refugee camp.

The father, Osama Abu Nasser was already suffering from Zionist-enforced poverty after his horse, his sole means of income, was killed. He took his son to buy supplies for the family. He was trapped by gunfire near his home and the IOF ordered him to abandon his son on the ground and to approach the Zionist checkpoint. He was then forced to strip naked.

According to witness statements, the Zionists took the child and interrogated the father with the child in front of him. The terrorists burned the child with cigarettes, inserted a metal nail into his leg while the father watched, powerless. This was later confirmed by a medical report.

After 10 hours of abuse, the child Karim was released and handed over to the International Red Cross. The father is still being detained.

Keep reading

The Iran Fiasco’s Silver Lining: Trump, Bibi, and the Neocons Got Their Clocks Cleaned

If you don’t think the Donald inhabits an alternative universe – just set your mandibles loose to chomp on his most recent missive. According to history’s most gifted practitioner of the Art of the Deal, only one thing really counts with respect to his Paperless Invite for Iran to join yet another round of negotiations: Namely, making good on their pledge to “never, ever” get a nuke, which they never, ever, ever actually had or had even pursued:

Trump: “This agreement is about one thing — that Iran will never have a nuclear weapon. Never ever ever. The rest of it is irrelevant, frankly.”

And just in case anyone missed the point, he further insisted that the real bad stuff that supposedly provoked the US/Israel attack in the first place – the 420 kilograms of 60% HEUs – and which the Donald had been on the verge sending in ground troops and Caterpillar earth-movers to retrieve, doesn’t matter so much any more, either!

Trump is backing away from getting Iran’s enriched material: “You could make the case, why even bother? It’s not very valuable stuff.”

That’s right. It is plain as day that the Donald is laying the ground work for a final “deal” with Iran that contains nothing more than a notional “No Nukes” pledge, gussied up by some variation of JCPOA Light.

That is, an agreement about:

  • the length in months and years of a moratorium on Iran’s fuel grade (3.67%) enrichment operations in support of its civilian nuclear power plant.
  • the scale of these civilian enrichment operations in terms of facilities and numbers and types of permitted centrifuges once they restart.
  • the intrusiveness of a renewed IAEA inspection regime.
  • the “snap-back” mechanisms designed to keep the mullahs on the straight and narrow of the overall Peace Plan.

Needless to say, the Obama folks will be proven to have done a far better job the first time around during their arduous negotiations of 2013-2015 than whatever cockamamie version emerges from a final deal that the Donald must and will sign in the shadows of the upcoming November Congressional elections.

Keep reading

When the Iran War Is Over: The West Bank May Be Netanyahu’s Next Front

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is facing perhaps the most precarious moment of his political career. He knows it. His allies know it. And his rivals – both within his coalition and across Israel’s political spectrum – are preparing to capitalize on his growing weakness.

Former Israeli Justice Minister Haim Ramon, who also served as deputy prime minister between 2007 and 2009, is among the latest Israeli political figures to join a growing chorus of criticism directed at Netanyahu.

“In the final result,” Ramon said in an interview with Radio Galey, cited by the Israeli outlet Srugim, “we did not win.” He then broke down that failure in blunt terms: “We did not win in Lebanon, we did not win in Iran, and we did not win against Hamas.”

Another prominent critic is former Israeli army chief Gadi Eisenkot, who joined Netanyahu’s emergency war government following the events of October 7, 2023, before resigning with Benny Gantz in June 2024.

Beyond accusing Netanyahu of failing to protect Israel on October 7, Eisenkot argues that the prime minister has effectively surrendered Israel’s political decision-making to US President Donald Trump, thereby strategically weakening Israel.

Ironically, Netanyahu’s coalition partners have often been even more opportunistic than the opposition.

Since the formation of the current coalition government on December 29, 2022 – widely regarded as the most right-wing government in Israel’s history – figures such as National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich have repeatedly used Netanyahu’s political vulnerability to expand their own influence. Whenever Netanyahu needed political support to remain in power, they demanded concessions in return.

For Israel’s far-right extremists, Netanyahu’s inability to secure decisive strategic victories has often translated into opportunities to advance their own agendas. Every setback on the battlefield became an opening for greater settlement expansion, harsher measures against Palestinians, and deeper entrenchment of extremist policies.

Unable to deliver ‘victory’, Netanyahu turned perpetual war into a political strategy in its own right. The result has been a genocidal war in Gaza, widespread devastation in Lebanon, and a dangerous confrontation with Iran that has repeatedly brought the region to the brink of a wider catastrophe.

For a time, this formula proved politically sustainable. Netanyahu successfully enlisted unwavering US support to keep the fires of war burning. At the same time, the failure of Europe and much of the international community to hold a wanted war criminal accountable provided him with the political space necessary to continue his bloody calculations.

Yet that formula may be nearing its limits. While this possibility may appear encouraging, it comes with a serious warning. If Netanyahu can no longer sustain the wars that have prolonged his political life for nearly three years, he may escalate where resistance is weakest: the occupied West Bank.

Regarding Iran, there is growing recognition that the current confrontation is unsustainable indefinitely and that some form of arrangement will eventually emerge. Likewise, regardless of whether Lebanon is formally included in any future agreement, Israel’s ambition of permanently occupying parts of Lebanese territory remains untenable.

Historically, when Israel fails to secure a strategic breakthrough on one front, it seeks compensation on another – typically where Palestinians are most vulnerable and where international scrutiny is weakest.

As Israeli elections approach, it is therefore reasonable to fear a further escalation of the genocide in Gaza, pushing both the death toll and the level of destruction to new heights. According to Gaza health authorities, nearly 1,000 Palestinians have been killed since the ceasefire agreement was announced in October, bringing the overall death toll of Israel’s genocide in Gaza to 73,000 Palestinians.

Though Israel’s war has already failed to break Palestinian steadfastness, the broader objective remains unchanged: the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from Gaza and the transformation of the Strip into a space that can no longer sustain Palestinian life.

The West Bank, however, presents a different challenge.

Keep reading

Gaza’s “Board of Peace” holds zero dollars despite billions pledged

In a stark revelation that underscores the paralysis of international reconstruction efforts, the World Bank-administered fund established for President Donald Trump’s “Board of Peace” in Gaza officially contains zero dollars. This finding comes despite approximately $17 billion in pledges from various nations, raising serious questions about the viability of the administration’s signature post-conflict initiative.

The board, personally chaired by Trump, was conceived to oversee the rebuilding of the devastated Palestinian enclave, but it remains a financial shell, stalled by legal uncertainty and disputes over transparency.

The empty vault: Where did the pledges go?

The core issue is a fundamental disconnect between promises and disbursement. A senior congressional aide confirmed that none of the pledged money has reached the Board of Peace. The Department of State has indicated there is no intention to route those funds through the board’s official channels. Instead of using the transparent, World Bank-administered account, the board has reportedly directed some donations into a private account at JPMorgan Chase.

This arrangement bypasses independent oversight and standard aid protocols, leaving donors and the public with limited visibility into how any funds are spent.

A king’s court or a UN-like agency?

The board’s unconventional structure has also drawn sharp criticism. Unlike traditional multilateral bodies, the Board of Peace is personally led by Trump, who retains final authority indefinitely. The charter requires countries to pay a one-billion-dollar fee for a permanent seat, a price tag that has deterred major European allies. Sen. Brian Schatz highlighted the tension between the State Department’s portrayal of the board as a standard UN-like agency and Trump’s characterization of it as a “king’s court.” Key powers like France and Britain have refused to pay the entry fee, leaving the board’s membership thin and its financial base weak.

No contracts, no construction: A stalled operation

The board has awarded no contracts for actual reconstruction projects, as it is not yet operating inside Gaza. The primary obstacle is Hamas’ refusal to disarm. Trump has linked all reconstruction aid to full demilitarization, creating a classic deadlock: the board cannot operate in Gaza without security, but security cannot be achieved without reconstruction funding. The Palestinian technocratic committee, formed to assume governance, remains unable to execute any work due to a total lack of funding. Even modest sums from Morocco and the UAE have been used primarily for staff salaries, not infrastructure.

Keep reading