The U.S. Power Structure is Blindly Dedicated to Israel

Recently there was an important event at Columbia Law School. The school’s law review published a piece on a sweeping legal theory of the Nakba by Harvard law student Rabea Eghbariah — and the board of the law review stepped in in unprecedented fashion to shut down the publication online. After the Intercept reported that the website had been “nuked,” the authoritarian move became an embarrassment; and the piece was restored. Though students obviously feel chilled.

This story reminds us that the U.S. establishment is firmly and blindly pro-Israel. The board that squashed the students included operators of the highest order: professor Gillian Metzger, who also serves in the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel; Justice Department senior counsel Lewis Yelin; and Ginger Anders, a former assistant to the U.S. Solicitor General.

We used to call people like this the ruling class. These high appointees understand what American values are, and today American values are standing by Israel even as it massacres thousands of children. These values surely have to do with the importance of Zionist donors to Joe Biden and universities, but they go beyond that to the makeup of the U.S. establishment. Pro-Israel voices — including Jewish Zionists — are a significant element of corporate culture. They are a generational force. Young progressives and young Jews are rejecting Israel. But they aren’t in the power structure.

One of the most telling stories about the establishment came and went last November. Two dozen leading law firms sent a letter to the leading law schools, including Harvard and Columbia, saying that they would not hire students from law schools that failed to crack down on antisemitism. And one of those firms, Davis Polk, rescinded job offers to three students who had taken part in pro-Palestinian protests. The letter said:

“We look to you to ensure your students who hope to join our firms after graduation are prepared to be an active part of workplace communities that have zero tolerance policies for any form of discrimination or harassment, much less the kind that has been taking place on some law school campuses.”

A partner at Sullivan & Cromwell told the New York Times that Jewish students feel “actually scared,” “threatened,” and “betrayed.” 

The letter was a shot across the bow of prestige schools well before Congress brought down the boom on the Harvard and Penn presidents in December. After all, the function of these schools — the reason young people clamor to get into them — is to gain employment in prestigious jobs upon graduation.

Just a week after the letter — shockingly — Columbia suspended the Palestinian solidarity groups Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) and Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP).

The law firms’ letter was “spearheaded,” the firm Paul, Weiss bragged at the time, by two Jewish chairs at two white-shoe firms (Joe Shenker, former chair of Sullivan and Cromwell, and Brad Karp, current chair at Paul, Weiss).

The letter was published at a time when many corporate leaders were issuing condemnations of the Hamas attack on Israel. Paul, Weiss chair Brad Karp explained to the Times that he was disappointed that more leaders weren’t doing so — and that being for Israel was no different than other great progressive causes, civil rights and women’s rights included.

Keep reading

Bankruptcy Trustee to Shut Down Infowars, Liquidate Its Assets to Pay Sandy Hook Families

A bankruptcy trustee on Sunday filed an emergency motion to shut down Infowars and Alex Jones’ parent company Free Speech Systems and liquidate its assets to pay the Sandy Hook families.

Earlier this month a federal judge ordered the liquidation of Alex Jones’ personal assets.

Judge Christopher Lopez approved Alex Jones’ request to convert a Chapter 11 business reorganization bankruptcy to a Chapter 7 personal bankruptcy.

However, a couple of weeks ago the judge dismissed the bankruptcy reorganization of Infowars and its parent company Free Speech Systems.

Legal experts said the Sandy Hook families could go back to the bankruptcy court and demand Alex Jones liquidate his company to pay off the Sandy Hook debt.

On Sunday the bankruptcy trustee said he intends to conduct an “orderly wind down” of Alex Jones’ media company.

Keep reading

Wales Moves Forward With Plan To Punish Politicians For Telling Lies

Will Rogers once said that “if you ever injected truth into politics, you’d have no politics.” In Wales, it appears that the government is challenging that assessment. However, if the new legislation criminalizing political lies is successful, the Welsh are likely to find themselves with the same abundance of lies but little free speech.

A proposal in the Welsh parliament (or the Senedd) would make it the first country in the world to impose criminal sanctions for lying politicians. Adam Price, the former leader of the liberal Plaid Cymru Party is pushing for the criminalization, citing a “credibility gap” in UK politics.

Astonishingly, this uniquely bad idea has received support from a key committee. Once on track for adoption, this is the type of law that can become self-propelling through the legislature. Few politicians want to go on record voting against a law banning political lies. The free speech implications are easily lost in the coverage.

The new law would make it a criminal offense for a member of the Senedd, or a candidate for election to the Senedd, to wilfully, or with intent to mislead, make or publish a statement that is known to be false or deceptive. There is a six-month period for challenges to be brought.

The law allows a defense that a statement could be “reasonably inferred” to be a statement of opinion, or if it were retracted with an apology within 14 days. If guilty, the politician would be disqualified from being a Senedd member.

The defense is hardly helpful.

It creates an uncertainty as to which statements would be deemed an opinion and which would be treated as a statement of fact. It invites selective and biased prosecutions. After all, what does it mean to accuse a politician of trying to “mislead” the public?

Keep reading

DHS ‘Intelligence Experts Group’ Classified Military Service, Religion, & Trump-Support As Indicators Of Domestic Extremism & Terrorism

A now disbanded group in Joe Biden’s Department Homeland Security (DHS) classified Trump supporters, members of the military, and people with religious views as persons likely to commit “domestic violent extremist” attacks, newly released internal files show.

DHS announced the formation of the “Homeland Intelligence Experts Group” in September 2023 to “provide advice and perspectives on intelligence and national security efforts” to the Department, but according to America First Legal, “it was a completely partisan group designed to provide top cover for the Department’s radical agenda

AFL and former Ambassador Richard Grenell filed a lawsuit against the Homeland Intelligence Experts Group soon after the group was announced, and spurred Republican members of Congress to take action against it.

AFL alleged that the group comprised of partisan actors violated the Federal Advisory Committee Act for various reasons – including its lack of balance, the Biden Administration’s inappropriate influence over it, and its lack of public notice and participation, among other things.

To avoid further litigation and scrutiny, the Biden regime agreed in May to disband the illegal group and provide its records to AFL. However, the group may have been active for a year before it was pressured to shut down.

“By the time the Homeland Intelligence Experts Group was announced in September 2023, the group had already been meeting for as long as four months,” AFL reported.

Members of the deep state cabal included former Obama intelligence officials and Russia collusion hoaxers John Brennan and James Clapper—both signatories of the infamous “Letter of 51,” which mislead the American public on the veracity of the Hunter Biden laptop story ahead of the 2020 election.

Also included in the unit were former Obama official Francis Taylor,  Asha George, Rajesh De, Caryn Wagner, and Elisa Massimino, all of whom contributed exclusively to Democrat candidates for political office.

During a meeting in September on “Collection Posture and Associated Challenges,” the partisan group discussed ways to get around the Constitutional limits to their domestic intelligence gathering goals.

Keep reading

World Economic Forum Pushes For AI Use and Collaboration in Fighting “Misinformation”

The dual approach of talking up the benefits of AI when it comes to using this still very much emerging tech to combat “disinformation,” while warning against the perils of AI in creating that same “disinformation” – continues.

The point at which these two approaches converge is censorship – “both disinformation warriors” who want to use AI in their fight, and AI doomsayers who claim deepfakes will destroy democracies, work towards “monitoring,” “labeling,” and ultimately, controlling content.

And sometimes they’re the same informal but powerful groups, or government agencies and legacy media.

In this “installment” of the AI story coming from the World Economic Forum (WEF), authored by heads of AI, Data, and Metaverse Cathy Li and Global Coalition for Digital Safety Project Lead Agustina Callegari, we learn that WEF would like policymakers, tech firms, researchers, and civil rights groups to all band together and push for deployment of advanced AI-driven systems combating “disinformation and misinformation.”

The technique they would like explored, developed, and used would rely on pattern, language, and context analysis “to aid content moderation.”

The two authors of the post published by WEF are optimists: they think (or say they do) that AI-driven content analysis is at a level where it is capable of “understanding” context almost perfectly – or as they put it, understanding “the nuances between misinformation (unintentional spread of falsehoods) and disinformation (deliberate spread).”

The article speaks favorably about authenticity and watermarking of content – such as is done by Adobe, Microsoft, et al., through their Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity (C2PA), throwing the obligatory bone in the direction of those worried about privacy and protecting journalists from persecution “in conflict zones” (but what about journalists in all the other zones?)

Keep reading

Feds Building Massive Detention Facilities IN ALL 50 STATES to Imprison Political Dissidents, Documentary Claims

The US federal government is in the process of building a massive network of internment camps spanning all 50 states intended not to house illegal aliens, but political dissidents, a shocking documentary claims.

Speaking to Redacted’s Clayton Morris, former Customs and Border Protection agent J.J. Carrell revealed a whistleblower in his upcoming documentary, “Treason,” exposes the scheme to build massive facilities that can house tens of thousands of people in every state.

“It’s not for these illegals,” says former federal contractor Kristi Hutcherson in an excerpt from the documentary.

“I believe it’s…kind of like what Nazis did with the Jews, concentration camps, processing facilities. They’re going to need somewhere to process the dissidents,” she says.

The 24-year CBP veteran went on to tell Morris that Hutcherson has access to federal databases where bids are placed for a variety of contracts.

“But… she says to me there’s bids for detention facilities being built in all 50 states in America,” he said.

Carrell notes despite hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants entering the US, he’s been informed by sources that the facilities, many of which are on the southern border, contain as many as 40,000 empty beds.

According to Carrell, Hutcherson explains in the interview the facilities are for dissidents who disobey the federal government, which may include people who refuse to take mandated jabs, defiant MAGA supporters, or members of militias.

Asked what the facilities look like, Carrell described, “I think they’re going to look like just the facilities that we’re seeing where the children are being held in, those FEMA camps.”

“That’s what they’re building. They’re building FEMA camps,” Carrell said, describing soft-sided large white tents surrounded by barbed-wire like those seen in New York City to house the migrant influx.

Keep reading

Australian Premier Creates Ministry In Charge Of ‘Changing Men’s Behavior’

The development of totalitarian governments always coincides with sweeping efforts to socially engineer the population to adhere to less rebellious behaviors.  Specific groups that present a threat to the regime are usually identified and targeted with propaganda or indoctrination.  In tandem, the rest of the population is also conditioned to fear those groups and treat them with suspicion.  In this way the establishment elites mold the more submissive public into a shield that protects them from the revolutionaries that might dethrone them.

But what happens when the social engineers want to create tyranny on a global scale?  The list of possible rebels grows exponentially larger and efforts to control them all or demonize them all become far more complex.  How can the elites simplify their agenda and suppress the public with more efficiency?  

The only answer is to attack and cripple the largest subset of the population that is most likely to give them problems in the future.  Which monolithic group is more likely to fight back against the system?  Obviously, the answer is masculine men.  Therefore, this new global regime seeks to undermine and sabotage men, labeling masculinity an existential danger to society, like nuclear weapons or global warming.

In recent years Australia has been at the forefront of many authoritarian experiments.  Their egregious violations of citizen liberties during the covid hysteria were astonishing.  Perhaps even worse has been the complete takeover of DEI within the Australian government along with the infestation of radical feminism.  Australia, it would seem, is all but lost to the nightmare of the woke religion.  

That’s why it’s not at all surprising that the the Premier of the Australian state of Victoria has created a new ministry tasked with the purpose of changing and perhaps even controlling men.

Jacinta Allan announced this month that state MP Tim Richardson would serve as the inaugural Parliamentary Secretary for Men’s Behavior Change – the first position of its kind in the country.  The appointment was in response to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese calling gender-based violence a “national crisis” and promising greater government action.  First, Australia blamed guns for violent crime; now they are blaming men in general.

Keep reading

George Clooney’s Foundation to Issue Arrest Warrant Requests for Journalists who say Nice Things About Russia

The Clooney Foundation for Justice’s Docket Project is pursuing secret arrest warrants for journalists in Europe whose reporting is favorable to Russia in a move that a Kremlin spokesperson has labeled “insane.”

By now, we’re all painfully aware that facts and truth don’t matter to a lot of people if they don’t align with their views, and now this foundation, which was founded by actor George Clooney and his wife, human rights lawyer Amal Clooney, is trying to use legal processes to stop professionals from doing their jobs.

The Docket Project’s legal director, Anna Neistat, recently told Voice of America radio that they are attempting to obtain the arrest warrants by appealing to the European countries that have laws against “war propaganda.” She announced: “We are submitting requests to initiate criminal proceedings in countries where this provision exists in the criminal code.”

She added: “If the warrant is issued, it essentially becomes an EU-wide warrant through Europol. This means journalists could potentially be arrested and extradited to the country investigating them.”

She would not disclose the names of the journalists they are targeting but did admit that they were focusing on “the most prominent Russian propagandists.”

Keep reading

Trudeau Pushes Online Censorship Bill To “Protect” People From “Misinformation”

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau last week complained that governments have allegedly been left without the necessary tools to “protect people from misinformation.”

This “dire” warning came as part of Trudeau’s effort to have the Online Harms Act (Bill C-63) – one of the most controversial of its kind pieces of censorship legislation in Canada of late – pushed across the finish line in the country’s parliament.

C-63 has gained notoriety among civil rights and privacy advocates because of some of its provisions around “hate speech,” “hate propaganda,” and “hate crime.”

Under the first two, people would be punished before they commit any transgression, but also retroactively.

However, in a podcast interview for the New York Times, Trudeau defended C-63 as a solution to the “hate speech” problem, and clearly, a necessary “tool,” since according to this politician, other avenues to battle real or imagined hate speech and crimes resulting from it online have been exhausted.

Not one to balk at speaking out of both sides of his mouth, Trudeau at one point essentially admits that the more control governments have (and the bill is all about control, critics say, regardless of how its sponsors try to sugarcoat it) the more likely they are to abuse it.

He nevertheless goes on to declare that new legislative methods of “protecting people from misinformation” are needed and, in line with this, talk up C-63 as some sort of balanced approach to the problem.

But it’s difficult to see that “balance” in C-63, which is currently debated in the House of Commons. If it becomes law, it will allow the authorities to keep people under house arrest should they decide these people could somewhere down the line commit “hate crime or hate propaganda” – a chilling application of the concept of “pre-crime.”

Keep reading

Tucker Carlson Investigation: FBI Interrogated and Purged Trump Supporters from Its Ranks – The Police State Is Real

The FBI is now a secret police organization that targets, humiliates, and severs ties with pro-Trump members in its ranks.

Tucker Carlson interviewed Tristan Leavitt who is the president of the group Empower Oversight in his latest interview.

Tristan Leavitt is representing an anonymous FBI whistleblower who was suspended indefinitely without pay after the Agency discovered he attended the protests on January 6, 2021 at the Ellipse and US Capitol.

Mr. Leavitt describes how Trump supporters were targeted and interrogated by the FBI for holding conservative beliefs.

Keep reading