Vance also directly rejected the idea of external control over the president, affirming, “So when people say that Israel is somehow manipulating or controlling the president of the United States, they are not controlling this president of the United States, which is one of the reasons why we have been able to have some of the success we have had in the Middle East.”
Vance reinforced his assertion of the president’s autonomy by referring to the negotiations surrounding the Gaza agreement.
Vance was referring to a question as to Israel‘s alleged influence over US President Donald Trump‘s foreign policy.
„I’m a Christian man, and I’m just confused why there’s this notion that we might owe Israel something or that they are our greatest ally or that we have to support this multi-hundred-billion dollar foreign aid package to Israel to cover this – to quote Charlie Kirk – ethnic cleansing in Gaza,“ the student asked.
(01. April 1967)
Presumably as a result of the increasing challenge to the Warren Commission‘s report, a public opinion poll recently indicated that 46% of the American public did not think that Oswald acted alone, while more than half of those polled thought that the Commission had left some questions unresolved. Doubtless polls abroad would show similar, or possibly more adverse results.
(…)
Innuendo of such seriousness affects not only the individual concerned, but also the whole reputation of the American government. Our organization itself is directly involved: among other facts, we contributed information to the investigation. Conspiracy theories have frequently thrown suspicion on our organization, for example by falsely alleging that Lee Harvey Oswald worked for us. The aim of this dispatch is to provide material countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in other countries. Background information is supplied in a classified section and in a number of unclassified attachments.
3. Action. We do not recommend that discussion of the assassination question be initiated where it is not already taking place. Where discussion is active, however, addresses are requested:
a. To discuss the publicity problem with liaison and friendly elite contacts (especially politicians and editors), pointing out that the Warren Commission made as thorough an investigation as humanly possible, that the charges of the critics are without serious foundation, and that further speculative discussion only plays into the hands of the opposition. Point out also that parts of the conspiracy talk appear to be deliberately generated by Communist propagandists. Urge them to use their influence to discourage unfounded and irresponsible speculation.
b. To employ propaganda assets to answer and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose. The unclassified attachments to this guidance should provide useful background material for passing to assets. Our ploy should point out, as applicable, that the critics are (I) wedded to theories adopted before the evidence was in, (I) politically interested, (III) financially interested, (IV) hasty and inaccurate in their research, or (V) infatuated with their own theories.
(…)
4. In private to media discussions not directed at any particular writer, or in attacking publications which may be yet forthcoming, the following arguments should be useful:
a. No significant new evidence has emerged which the Commission did not consider. The assassination is sometimes compared (e.g., by Joachim Joesten and Bertrand Russell) with the Dreyfus case; however, unlike that case, the attack on the Warren Commission have produced no new evidence, no new culprits have been convincingly identified, and there is no agreement among the critics. (A better parallel, though an imperfect one, might be with the Reichstag fire of 1933, which some competent historians (Fritz Tobias, AJ.P. Taylor, D.C. Watt) now believe was set by Vander Lubbe on his own initiative, without acting for either Nazis or Communists; the Nazis tried to pin the blame on the Communists, but the latter have been more successful in convincing the world that the Nazis were to blame.)
Some regional stakeholders have likened Barghouti to formerly imprisoned South African anti-apartheid activist-turned-president Nelson Mandela, and view him as a potential successor to Abbas due to his widespread appeal across various Palestinian factions.
While he has expressed support for “armed resistance” against “the Israeli occupation” in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza Strip, he has also backed a two-state solution based on the pre-1967 borders and spoken out against targeting civilians inside Israel proper.
Eine Außenministerin verteidigt das Bombardieren von Krankenhäusern und Schulen; ein Bundeskanzler beschreibt einen illegalen, unprovozierten Luftkrieg als notwendige »Drecksarbeit«; Politiker und Journalisten stellen immer wieder infrage, ob die grausamen Bilder von Massenmord in Gaza nicht vielleicht doch gestellt sind. Demonstrierende werden auf Berliner Straßen von der Polizei brutal zusammengeschlagen, und die liberalen Stimmen, die sonst ihre Bereitschaft, für die freie Meinungsäußerung zu sterben, laut kundtun, bleiben auf einmal still. Eine unfassbare Entmenschlichung macht sich breit, und diejenigen, die diese kritisieren – darunter nicht wenige Menschen jüdischer Abstammung – werden als Antisemiten diffamiert. Es fühlt sich nicht selten so an, als würde Deutschland eine Parallelrealität bewohnen.
(August 30, 2025)
The Horizon Europe program, described by the EU as ‘a scientific research initiative to develop a sustainable and livable society in Europe,’ has awarded around 475 million euros to 348 Israeli start-ups and research projects since October 2023, many of which are run by former IDF soldiers and intelligence officers.
In 2024, the EU awarded grants of €220m to 179 companies and initiatives run by Israelis. The scale of this funding, coming in a year when the world’s pre-eminent genocide experts all declared Israel was committing a genocide, a year in which entire cities were wiped out and tens of thousands of civilians murdered, is staggering.
In the same year Israel was also the third largest recipient, behind France and Germany, of ‘accelerator’ grants, a separate component of the Horizon program intended to support small and medium-sized companies working to improve life in Europe.
(August 6, 2025)
Then Charlie Kirk, founder of “Turning Point USA,” joins to discuss Beyonce‘s new Levi‘s ad portraying a faker look than the Sydney Sweeney American Eagle ads, the leftist meltdown about the Sweeney campaign compared to their praise of Beyonce, the attempt to gaslight about the Sydney Sweeney backlash as a fake MAGA controversy, the truth about the left‘s coverage of the campaign as using Nazi imagery and promoting white supremacy, some Israel supporters demanding their 100% support for Israel at all times, some attacking their moral character and trying to dictate their coverage, outrageous accusations of antisemitism,
Der Grimme-Förderverein hat Judith Scheytt den Preis für ihre Medienkritik an der Berichterstattung zu Gaza entzogen – doch statt klein beizugeben, bleibt sie konsequent. Ihr nächster Schritt: Sie wird mit der »Global Sumud Flotilla« nach Gaza segeln.
(01. April 1967)
Presumably as a result of the increasing challenge to the Warren Commission‘s report, a public opinion poll recently indicated that 46% of the American public did not think that Oswald acted alone, while more than half of those polled thought that the Commission had left some questions unresolved. Doubtless polls abroad would show similar, or possibly more adverse results.
(…)
Innuendo of such seriousness affects not only the individual concerned, but also the whole reputation of the American government. Our organization itself is directly involved: among other facts, we contributed information to the investigation. Conspiracy theories have frequently thrown suspicion on our organization, for example by falsely alleging that Lee Harvey Oswald worked for us. The aim of this dispatch is to provide material countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in other countries. Background information is supplied in a classified section and in a number of unclassified attachments.
3. Action. We do not recommend that discussion of the assassination question be initiated where it is not already taking place. Where discussion is active, however, addresses are requested:
a. To discuss the publicity problem with liaison and friendly elite contacts (especially politicians and editors), pointing out that the Warren Commission made as thorough an investigation as humanly possible, that the charges of the critics are without serious foundation, and that further speculative discussion only plays into the hands of the opposition. Point out also that parts of the conspiracy talk appear to be deliberately generated by Communist propagandists. Urge them to use their influence to discourage unfounded and irresponsible speculation.
b. To employ propaganda assets to answer and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose. The unclassified attachments to this guidance should provide useful background material for passing to assets. Our ploy should point out, as applicable, that the critics are (I) wedded to theories adopted before the evidence was in, (I) politically interested, (III) financially interested, (IV) hasty and inaccurate in their research, or (V) infatuated with their own theories.
(…)
4. In private to media discussions not directed at any particular writer, or in attacking publications which may be yet forthcoming, the following arguments should be useful:
a. No significant new evidence has emerged which the Commission did not consider. The assassination is sometimes compared (e.g., by Joachim Joesten and Bertrand Russell) with the Dreyfus case; however, unlike that case, the attack on the Warren Commission have produced no new evidence, no new culprits have been convincingly identified, and there is no agreement among the critics. (A better parallel, though an imperfect one, might be with the Reichstag fire of 1933, which some competent historians (Fritz Tobias, AJ.P. Taylor, D.C. Watt) now believe was set by Vander Lubbe on his own initiative, without acting for either Nazis or Communists; the Nazis tried to pin the blame on the Communists, but the latter have been more successful in convincing the world that the Nazis were to blame.)
Teresa Ribera, the European Commission’s executive vice president, also said Europe was too divided to do anything about the starvation, displacement and killing of Palestinians.
“The genocide in Gaza exposes Europe’s failure to act and speak with one voice, even as protests spread across European cities and 14 U.N. Security Council members call for an immediate ceasefire,” Ribera told students at Sciences Po in a speech Thursday morning.
(September 2, 2025)
„There was a time where you couldn‘t speak bad, if you wanted to be a politician, you couldn‘t speak badly. But today, you have, you know, AOC plus three, and you have all these lunatics, and they‘ve really, they‘ve changed it. You‘re too young to know this, but if you go back 15 years, probably that‘s when it started… Israel was the strongest lobby I‘ve ever seen. They had total control over Congress, and now they don‘t, you know, I‘m a little surprised to see that. And people, they forgot about October 7th. You know, October 7th was a truly horrible day, because I‘ve seen the pictures,“ Trump elaborated.
(September 2, 2025)
In an interview with The Daily Caller, Trump said that because of left-wing U.S. politicians rallying against Israel and the growing unpopularity of its war in Gaza, the country is losing influence.
„Israel, you would understand this very much, Israel was the strongest lobby I’ve ever seen. They had total control over Congress, and now they don’t, you know, I’m a little surprised to see that,“ he said.
“What we’re now witnessing in Gaza is perhaps one of the darkest episodes of international relations in the 21st century, and in this regard what I have to say is that Spain has been very vocal within the EU and also within the international community,” he said. “Within the EU, what we have done so far is advocate to suspend the strategic partnership that the EU has with Israel.”
(August 30, 2025)
Q. Can you point to one concrete step regarding Israel that the countries actually agreed on today. After today‘s meeting, do you expect a more unified EU putting pressure on Israel and taking concrete steps?
First, we had an informal Council, so that means that we actually do not adopt decisions here, but we really have the political debates on where is the room. So, no decisions today.
Most Israel sanctions options – such as blacklisting settlers, banning settler imports, or imposing an arms embargo – required EU consensus, meaning the Czechs and Israel‘s other top EU ally, Hungary, would veto them.
Some options – such as freezing Horizon or Israel‘s EU free-trade perks – could be done by a qualified majority in the EU Council, but there was no majority without Germany and Italy on board.
(August 27, 2025)
Israel’s Rafael Advanced Defense Systems on Tuesday announced a €358 million ($415 million) deal with the German Air Force for advanced targeting technology for fighter aircraft.
“The German parliament has authorized the procurement of 90 Litening 5 targeting pods for its Eurofighter Typhoon fleet,” the defense electronics company said in its announcement.
Ob der Sanktionsvorschlag der Kommission umgesetzt werden kann, hängt davon ab, ob er im Rat der Mitgliedstaaten die Unterstützung einer qualifizierten Mehrheit bekommt – das heißt: 15 der 27 EU-Staaten, die zusammen mindestens 65 Prozent der Bevölkerung der teilnehmenden Mitgliedstaaten repräsentieren, müssen zustimmen. Zuletzt fehlte nur noch die Unterstützung von Deutschland oder Italien. Alle anderen großen EU-Staaten und viele kleinere sind für die Strafmaßnahme.
Die vorgesehene Einstellung von Zusammenarbeit im Rahmen des Forschungsförderungsprogramms Horizon Europe sei eine Maßnahme, die vermutlich keinen Einfluss auf die politische Willensbildung und auf das militärische Vorgehen Israels im Gazastreifen hätte, betonte Wadephul. Deswegen sei man von diesen Vorschlägen nicht so sehr überzeugt.
Was ist also mit jenen, die schon früh das Richtige gesagt haben? Was ist mit jenen, die das Grauen in Gaza nicht schweigend hingenommen und dafür einen hohen Preis bezahlt haben? Die Liste der Betroffenen ist lang und im Archive of Silence und dem Index of Repression ausführlich dokumentiert. Besonders drastische Beispiele lieferten die Technische Universität München, wo Studierende, die an einer palästinasolidarischen Veranstaltung teilnehmen wollten, von der Polizei in einem Raum eingesperrt und anschließend wegen »Hausfriedensbruch« angezeigt wurden, obwohl sie von der Universität selbst dort hineingelockt worden waren.
Weitere eindrückliche Beispiele sind die Entlassung Melanie Schweizers aus dem Arbeitsministerium, die Absagen gleich mehrerer Veranstaltungen mit der UN-Sonderberichterstatterin Francesca Albanese, die Kündigung von Helen Fares durch den SWR, die rechtswidrige Auflösung des Palästina-Kongresses in Berlin, die Absage der »Talking about (the Silencing of) Palestine«-Konferenz in Frankfurt oder die Einstufung der Jüdischen Stimme für gerechten Frieden und Palästina Spricht als extremistische Organisationen durch den Verfassungsschutz. Die Liste ließe sich endlos fortführen – und sie bleibt notwendig unvollständig.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
ODNI News Release No. 15-25
July 18, 2025
New Evidence of Obama Administration Conspiracy to Subvert President Trump’s 2016 Victory and Presidency
WASHINGTON, D.C. – On Friday, Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard revealed overwhelming evidence that demonstrates how, after President Trump won the 2016 election against Hillary Clinton, President Obama and his national security cabinet members manufactured and politicized intelligence to lay the groundwork for what was essentially a years-long coup against President Trump.
– In the months leading up to the November 2016 election, the Intelligence Community (IC) consistently assessed that Russia is “probably not trying … to influence the election by using cyber means.”
– On December 7, 2016, after the election, talking points were prepared for DNI James Clapper stating, “Foreign adversaries did not use cyberattacks on election infrastructure to alter the US Presidential election outcome.”
-On December 9, 2016, President Obama’s White House gathered top National Security Council Principals for a meeting that included James Clapper, John Brennan, Susan Rice, John Kerry, Loretta Lynch, Andrew McCabe and others, to discuss Russia.
– After the meeting, DNI Clapper’s Executive Assistant sent an email to IC leaders tasking them with creating a new IC assessment “per the President’s request” that details the “tools Moscow used and actions it took to influence the 2016 election.” It went on to say, “ODNI will lead this effort with participation from CIA, FBI, NSA, and DHS.”
– Obama officials leaked false statements to media outlets, including The Washington Post, claiming, “Russia has attempted through cyber means to interfere in, if not actively influence, the outcome of an election.”
– On January 6, 2017, a new Intelligence Community Assessment was released that directly contradicted the IC assessments that were made throughout the previous six months.
(July 23, 2025)
(July 22, 2025)
The release of more than 100 pages of declassified files and a memorandum by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has reignited political battles over Russia‘s actions during the 2016 presidential election, a topic that has long incensed President Trump and put the actions of the U.S. intelligence community in partisan crosshairs.
(November 12, 2014)
1966 gründete Bertrand Russell angesichts der Kriegsverbrechen des u.s-amerikanischen Militärs im Vietnamkrieg das Russell-Tribunal. In 2014 tagte die traditionsreiche Institution über die israelischen Kriegsverbrechen im Feldzug gegen den Gazastreifen in diesem Sommer. Referenten des Russell-Tribunals, neben Juroren wie Roger Waters: David Sheen (Israel) und Max Blumenthal (U.S.A.). Am 9., 10. und 11. November wollten David und Max auf Veranstaltungen in Berlin über das Russell-Tribunal und dessen Ergebnisse berichten.
Die Veranstaltung am 9. November sagte die Volksbühne, nach einem Brief von Volker Beck (Bündnis 90/Die Grünen, Vorsitzender der deutsch-israelischen Parlamentariergruppe), Petra Pau (Die Linke) und dem ehemaligen Wehrbeauftragten Reinhold Robbe (SPD, Vorsitzender der deutsch-israelischen Gesellschaft e.V.), am Vorabend der Veranstaltung wieder ab – offenbar unter direkter Intervention von Gregor Gysi, Fraktionsführer von Die Linke im Bundestag. Auf der kurzfristig verlegten Veranstaltung berichteten sowohl David Sheen, als auch Max Blumenthal, von einem gefährlichen Rechtsruck in der israelischen Gesellschaft, in der Rassismus, Verfolgung gegen Andersdenkende und Andersgläubige, sowie Linke und Dissidenten, mittlerweile salonfähig genauso geworden sind wie Demonstrationen gegen interreligiöse Heirat. Diese Entwicklung reicht bereits bis hin zu Forderungen nach „Konzentration“ und „Auslöschung“ aufständischer Palästinenser, erhoben durch den Parlamentspräsidenten Moshe Feiglin, und der Beschimpfung afrikanischer Flüchtlinge als „Krebs“ der Gesellschaft durch die heutige Vorsitzende des Innenausschusses der Knesset, Miri Regev.
Sowohl David Sheen, als auch Max Blumenthal, zeigten sich äußerst irritiert darüber, dass ihnen zuvor durch deutsche Politiker, Volker Beck, Petra Pau, Reinhold Robbe, im Brief an die Volksbühne unterstellt worden war, sie würden durch diese Berichte
„antisemitische Ressentiments bedienen und die Terrorherrschaft der Nazis durch Vergleiche mit der israelischen Regierung relativieren.“
(July 14, 2025)
“This week, the dominoes are falling,” said Hillel Neuer, executive director of UN Watch. “First, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio made the historic decision to sanction Francesca Albanese, the UN’s pro-Hamas rapporteur, in wake of a massive campaign led by UN Watch. Now the architects of the UN’s anti-Israel inquisition are fleeing the ship. The tide is turning.”
(July 16, 2025)
The letters were posted on a back-end Human Rights Council website and first publicised by UN Watch, a nonprofit monitoring group.
The commission will continue to exist once new members are appointed. Jürg Lauber, head of the Human Rights Council, has asked member states to propose replacements by 31 August.
(June 19, 2025)
In a letter addressed to the Federal Minister of the Interior of Germany published today, Commissioner O’Flaherty raises concerns about restrictions to freedom of expression and freedom of peaceful assembly of persons protesting in the context of the conflict in Gaza, as well as about reports of excessive use of force by police against protesters, including children.
Commissioner O’Flaherty also observes restrictions on events, symbols, or other forms of expression in this context. He recalls that member states have little scope to impose restrictions on political speech or on debate on matters of public interest, in line with the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights and the Council of Europe standards on freedom of expression, hate speech and hate crime. He urges the German authorities to be vigilant that the working definition of antisemitism of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance is not distorted, instrumentalised or misapplied to stifle freedom of expression and legitimate criticism, including of the state of Israel.
Recalling that member states have legal obligations to refrain from undue interference with human rights and to ensure the effective enjoyment of the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly for all, the Commissioner asks the German authorities to avoid taking measures that discriminate against persons based on their political or other opinions, religion or belief, ethnic origin, nationality or migration status.
(June 6, 2025)
It is my understanding that since February 2025, the Berlin authorities have imposed restrictions on the use of the Arabic language and cultural symbols in the context of the protests. In some cases, such as an assembly in Berlin on 15 May 2025, marches have been restricted to stationary gatherings. Furthermore, protestors were allegedly subject to intrusive surveillance, online or in person, and arbitrary police checks. I am also concerned by reports of excessive use of force by police against protesters, including minors, sometimes leading to injuries.
(…)
I understand that restrictions have been justified on the basis that events, symbols, or other forms of expression “disrupt public order” or “disturb public peace”. The case-law of the European Court of Human Rights’ (the Court) establishes that freedom of expression “applies not only to ‘information’ and ‘ideas’ that are favourably received, regarded as inoffensive, or which leave one indifferent […] – it implies pluralism, tolerance and openness, without which there is no ‘democratic society’”. In assessing the necessity of the interference, member states have little scope to impose restrictions on political speech or on debate on matters of public interest, unless the views expressed comprise incitements to violence, and must always carry out such an assessment case by case.
I observe that other justifications invoked for the restrictions on rights include the prevention of antisemitism. I note with concern reports indicating that the working definition of antisemitism of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) has been interpreted by some German authorities in ways which lead to the blanket classification of criticism of Israel as antisemitic. In that regard, I urge you to be vigilant that the IHRA working definition is not distorted, instrumentalised or misapplied to stifle freedom of expression and legitimate criticism, including of the state of Israel
(June 19, 2025)
In a letter addressed to the Federal Minister of the Interior of Germany published today, Commissioner O’Flaherty raises concerns about restrictions to freedom of expression and freedom of peaceful assembly of persons protesting in the context of the conflict in Gaza, as well as about reports of excessive use of force by police against protesters, including children.
Commissioner O’Flaherty also observes restrictions on events, symbols, or other forms of expression in this context. He recalls that member states have little scope to impose restrictions on political speech or on debate on matters of public interest, in line with the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights and the Council of Europe standards on freedom of expression, hate speech and hate crime. He urges the German authorities to be vigilant that the working definition of antisemitism of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance is not distorted, instrumentalised or misapplied to stifle freedom of expression and legitimate criticism, including of the state of Israel.
Recalling that member states have legal obligations to refrain from undue interference with human rights and to ensure the effective enjoyment of the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly for all, the Commissioner asks the German authorities to avoid taking measures that discriminate against persons based on their political or other opinions, religion or belief, ethnic origin, nationality or migration status.
Der Menschenrechtskommissar des Europarates, Michael O’Flaherty, hat in einem am 19. Juni veröffentlichten Brief an Bundesinnenminister Alexander Dobrindt seine Besorgnis über Einschränkungen der Meinungs- und Versammlungsfreiheit in Deutschland zum Ausdruck gebracht. Explizit verweist er in dem Schreiben auf die behördliche Repression von Protesten gegen Israels Vorgehen in Gaza sowie eine Instrumentalisierung des Antisemitismusvorwurfs, „um legitime Kritik, auch am Staat Israel, zu unterdrücken.“
Amos Hochstein, who was a senior official focused on the Middle East during the Biden administration, described a pattern of Israeli leaders presenting headstrong views on security and using the U.S. as a scapegoat to rein them in with hawkish security officials and hard-line political partners.
“I’ll say something a bit controversial, but in my mind, since Ronald Reagan, Israel doesn’t have a stop button,” Hochstein said on the “Unholy: Two Jews on the News” podcast June 19.
“Every prime minister, right-wing, left-wing centrist goes to his, whoever it is at the time, the military, the intelligence, his, you know, extremist parties and says, ‘I’m with you, but these darn Americans are forcing me to stop.’ And they’re like, all right, fine, we’ll stop and we’ll do a deal. And that’s been the case in every operation since the 1980s.”
The moves come amid deepening tensions between U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, particularly over a potential Israeli strike on Iran and the ongoing war in Gaza. Israel has repeatedly opposed Washington’s nuclear negotiations with Tehran and has hinted at launching a solo attack against Iran.
(May 28, 2025)
The Israeli government is conducting an “intensive” diplomatic campaign to prevent Germany from imposing “or even suggesting” a potential ban on arms exports to Israel, as reported by Israeli public broadcaster KAN 11 on 27 May.
Tel Aviv is specifically looking to influence the office of German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and the German Foreign Ministry by claiming that the US-Israeli aid distribution mechanism in southern Gaza represents a “dramatic and fundamental shift” from the total blockade imposed since March.
I don’t know who the cardinals will pick to replace him, but I do know with absolute certainty that there are transnational intelligence operations in the works to make sure they select a more reliable supporter of Israel.