Pages

▼

Friday, May 22, 2026

05/21 Links Pt1: Donald Trump, do not negotiate with the devil in Tehran; Hunting the Terrorists of October 7; Argentine ex-prosecutor charged with cover-up in 2015 death of AMIA bombing investigator

From Ian:

Donald Trump, do not negotiate with the devil in Tehran
The countdown to the regime’s fall
Two years ago, I put up billboards all over Israel. The billboards displayed a countdown clock similar to the one in Tehran that counts down the days until Israel’s destruction. The Iranian regime set its clock for the year 2040.

I wanted to send a message back to Tehran: regimes built on terror do not last. I put up billboards around Israel with a countdown clock set to October 28, 2028, predicting the end of the ayatollahs’ regime in Iran.

October 28 is a famous date in Iran because it recognizes Cyrus the Great Day.

The poison chalice
The only solution is to squeeze Iran tighter. The mullahs cannot be reasoned with through negotiations.

The good news is that the world’s tolerance for terror is extremely low, and the business of terror is being exposed. Islamic wokeism is collapsing. The Iranian people themselves are exhausted by decades of corruption, isolation, and religious tyranny. That is why the vast majority of the Persian people have turned against the regime. That is also why some of the most popular words heard in Iran are “Uncle Trump” and “Bibi.”

Ayatollah Khamenei once referred to his forced acceptance of a ceasefire in the Iran-Iraq War as “drinking the poison chalice.” He did it because economic collapse and military pressure had left him no choice.

Iran needs to drink the poison chalice again.

You can’t negotiate with demons
You cannot kill a demon with a bullet.The ideology driving terror in Iran will not disappear. This is an ideological war, a media war, a proxy war, and a spirit war. It is a battle against principalities and powers, against demonic spirits.

And you can be sure of one thing: demons lie.

Iran has no intention of honoring its promises. The spine of the regime will have to be broken, either economically or militarily.
Seth Mandel: Hunting the Terrorists of October 7
It is deliberately reminiscent of previous shadow campaigns. The name, NILI, is an acronym that was also given to a World War I Jewish spy network, though for most readers the article will likely call to mind the retributive campaign against the participants of the Munich massacre at the Olympics in 1972.

Putting names on the list and then finding and eliminating the terrorists is extremely difficult work. It can sometimes take years to get IDF approval for a single target. That’s because the campaign is meticulous in its adherence to legal rules that govern such considerations. Even if the campaign “feels retributive” to the average person, former U.S. Air Force judge advocate Rachel VanLandingham told the Journal, “the law doesn’t disallow that.”

As the aforementioned case demonstrates, Israel is even careful to abide by the rules of the cease-fire deal, in which it can respond to attacks but refrains from initiating them.

That is one element of the moral framework of this campaign. Another is the message: Jewish blood comes at a cost. Those who kill Israelis will be hunted down and given earthly justice. No one is allowed to get away with doing what these Palestinians did on October 7. “Agents run the images through facial recognition programs to sift for names, the officials said, and comb through intercepted phone calls. They view location data from cell tower logs and interrogate Gazan detainees to uncover who did what.”

Hamas itself has helped the process because so many terrorists videotaped and broadcast their demonic campaign of slaughter and torture. That makes it easier to find them. To my mind, it also makes it more important to find them and deliver justice.

That the Gazans’ crimes of that day were on par with those of the Nazis and of the pogromists of the Russian empire is indisputable. That the perpetrators were so proud of their work, and that they (incorrectly) assumed it would inspire Arabs within Israel to do the same, is civilizational poison, and must be treated as such. And that Israel is dispensing justice while so carefully hewing to laws, norms, and agreements is a reminder that this battle can be won.
Israel's Campaign to Kill or Capture Every Oct. 7 Attacker
On Oct. 7, 2023, a video surfaced of an Israeli woman screaming, "Don't kill me," as she was hauled away on a motorcycle between two kidnappers. Noa Argamani spent 245 days captive in Gaza. After her release, two men seen in the video holding back Argamani's boyfriend were tracked down by Israeli intelligence officials and killed in separate airstrikes. The men were crossed off a list of thousands of names kept by an Israeli task force created to kill or capture all who planned or joined in the Oct. 7 attack, Israeli officials said.

Hundreds have been struck from the list, in one of the most personal and highly technical targeting campaigns in the history of warfare. Security forces mark men for death if they find at least two pieces of evidence showing they took part in crimes during the Oct. 7 attacks, according to Israeli security officials. Hundreds of Gazans charged with participating in the Oct. 7 attacks are in Israeli custody awaiting trial. The parliament recently passed a bill to establish a special military tribunal.

The task force killed Hamas fighters who paraglided into Israel on Oct. 7, others who raided border communities, and those who participated in the killing of hundreds of revelers at the Nova music festival, where Argamani and her boyfriend were kidnapped. On Feb. 4, Hamas operative Muhammed Issam Hassan al-Habil was killed by a drone that fired at his car in Gaza. The Israeli military and security services said they learned through interrogations that Habil was responsible for the death of Noa Marciano, a female soldier taken hostage and killed in captivity.

Michael Milstein, a former senior Israeli military intelligence officer on Palestinian affairs, said, "In the Middle East, revenge is an important part of the discourse. It is about how serious anyone in your environment sees you. Unfortunately, this is the language of this neighborhood."


Shifting from Diplomatic Urgency to Strategic Patience on Iran
The Islamic Republic appears convinced that time and escalation management are in its favor, while the Trump administration continues searching for mechanisms that could ease the global crisis without drawing the U.S. back into large-scale military operations.

Reflecting accumulated lessons drawn from previous interactions with multiple U.S. administrations, Iranian policymakers are convinced that prolonged diplomacy and strategic patience - if not outright entrenchment in their positions - could gradually increase American flexibility over time. Tehran concluded that America can exert severe pressure, but the regime can survive it.

Within Iran's longstanding doctrine of "controlled endurance," negotiations are not primarily pathways to compromise, but mechanisms for managing pressure, extending timelines, and testing the political patience of adversaries. Today, amid the growing influence of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), Tehran appears even more confident that uncompromising positions can generate long-term strategic gains. As long as the regime believes American urgency will ultimately produce American concessions, there is little incentive for meaningful Iranian flexibility.

The most appropriate response to this decades-long Iranian strategy is strategic patience. No superpower should cast itself as seeking an agreement at any cost. A better, more realistic option may be to deemphasize the push for rapid resolution and instead pursue a strategy of long-term, controlled pressure on several fronts simultaneously.

Sustained maritime pressure including continued blockade measures against Iranian ports and vessels would directly undermine Tehran's ability to generate revenue, particularly from oil exports. Since Iran has spent years constructing alternative commercial corridors and sanctions-evasion mechanisms, broader economic pressure should include tighter enforcement against trade and financial networks connected to Iran's neighbors. The objective is to raise the cost for the wide spectrum of banks, shipping companies, energy intermediaries, logistical firms, and insurance companies that help Iran evade sanctions.

Washington's primary advantage in this confrontation is not just military superiority - it also lies in America's structural economic power, global financial influence, alliance architecture, and capacity to sustain pressure over time without exhausting itself. Employing them in tandem presents a credible path to strategic success without requiring immediate military escalation.
Sanctions Without Enforcement: How Iran's Shadow Banking Network Exploits Western Weakness
The limits of traditional economic warfare are laid bare by the highly resilient, deeply entrenched shadow banking networks of the Islamic Republic of Iran. For decades, Western capitals have operated under the assumption that isolating a rogue regime from the formal global financial system will eventually force a behavioral shift or structural collapse. Yet, as the contemporary crisis illustrates, this has merely accelerated the perfection of a parallel, dark financial universe.

The latest wave of Western counter-measures, orchestrated primarily by an aggressive U.S. Treasury, represents a desperate attempt to map and dismantle these hidden circuits. However, this campaign is fundamentally undermined by the institutional complacency and regulatory negligence of European partners, most notably the United Kingdom.

London's permissive corporate ecosystem have inadvertently turned the British capital into a premium operational playground for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), demonstrating that the ultimate failure of sanctions lies in their fractured, asymmetrical Western enforcement.

The IRGC's sophisticated shadow banking architecture relies on a complex hierarchy of front companies, proxy-owned trade houses, and compromised Digital Asset Service Providers scattered across East Asia, the Middle East, and parts of Europe. Under this model, the physical movement of Iranian oil and dual-use goods is decoupled from the financial transactions that fund them. Revenues from the illicit shadow fleet are processed through third-country bank accounts held in the names of seemingly legitimate, locally registered commercial entities.

The IRGC and its financial proxies have taken advantage of the UK's notoriously relaxed company registration system operated by Companies House, the UK's registrar of companies. IRGC networks have systematically exploited this administrative loophole to incorporate hundreds of shell companies on British soil. v These UK-registered entities carry an aura of Western corporate legitimacy, allowing them to open bank accounts across Europe, secure digital payment gateways, and enter into contracts with international suppliers who perform only superficial due diligence. By the time Western intelligence agencies map these corporate fronts, the entities have already moved tens of millions of dollars through the UK banking system, dissolved themselves, and reconstituted under new names within the exact same registrar.

There is an equally problematic lack of robust enforcement within the European Union. An Iranian front company blocked from operating in Frankfurt or Paris can simply shift its registration and banking operations to member states with more permissive regulatory environments in Southern or Eastern Europe. This transatlantic enforcement asymmetry transforms the Western sanctions regime into a sieve. The battle against Iranian shadow banking cannot be won by the U.S. Treasury acting in isolation.
No, Foreign Officials Do Not Get First Amendment Immunity from U.S. Sanctions
Even setting aside jurisdiction, the merits analysis fails. The judge treated the designation as punishment for “speech” and leaned on the finding that Albanese made only “non-binding recommendations” with no formal power over the ICC. But sanctions law routinely reaches communicative conduct: coordination, advice, targeting letters, strategic guidance, organized pressure campaigns, etc. None of those are binding, and the First Amendment does not automatically immunize those acts when they are part of a foreign sanctions-triggering course of conduct.

The opinion’s treatment of Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project illustrates the problem of the court’s sleight of hand. The Supreme Court there upheld restrictions on coordinated “speech” that assisted foreign terrorist organizations, explaining that coordinated assistance to a foreign entity can be regulated as conduct even when it takes the form of words. The judge here quoted Holder for the line that “independently advocating for a cause is different from providing a service,” then assumed the very conclusion in dispute (i.e., that Albanese was merely independently advocating). The government’s theory was not that she criticized Israel or held an anti-American viewpoint. It was that she engaged with ICC efforts to prosecute protected persons. Her recommendations were not op-ed commentary; they were coordinated participation in a foreign coercive legal campaign, which is precisely the distinction Holder drew. A sanctions regime targeting that assistance is not viewpoint discrimination. Sanctioning someone for saying “I support Palestine” would raise serious First Amendment problems. Sanctioning someone for materially assisting an international tribunal’s unauthorized effort to prosecute Americans is a foreign affairs and national security judgment.

The broader implications are serious. Treasury has sanctioned Russian and Iranian actors for election-interference operations run through fake media fronts and disinformation campaigns; RT executives and proxy websites for malign-influence networks; militia figures for incitement; and Bosnian actors whose secessionist rhetoric was part of a destabilization campaign. Abstract opinions are not sanctionable, but coordination, targeting, strategic advice, and organized pressure campaigns do not become constitutionally protected just because they travel through speech. If foreign nationals abroad can invoke the First Amendment whenever sanctions touch recommendations, reports, or advocacy directed at a foreign enforcement body, much of the U.S. sanctions architecture is suddenly vulnerable: terror-finance, cyber, corruption, foreign-interference, human-rights sanctions all often turn on communications. That is not what the First Amendment provides, and it is why the administration should appeal.

The appeal should not focus on whether Francesca Albanese is awful. She is. It should focus on whether a district judge can constitutionalize a foreign official’s campaign against American nationals simply because she calls it advocacy, and whether the United States must keep its financial system open to those who materially assist an international campaign targeting U.S. citizens and allies for prosecution in a tribunal with no legitimate jurisdiction over them. The answers are no.
Trump admin challenges injunction lifting sanctions on Francesa Albanese
The U.S. Justice Department lodged an appeal for emergency relief to re-impose sanctions on Francesa Albanese, United Nations special rapporteur for the Palestinians, after a federal judge lifted the designation temporarily.

The Trump administration sanctioned Albanese, who has a history of making antisemitic and anti-Israel statements, in July for what it said was an intimidation campaign against U.S. companies and groups with ties to Israel.

Richard Leon, a U.S. district court judge, ruled that the sanctions likely violated Albanese’s free speech.

Brett Shumate, U.S. assistant attorney general, challenged the judge’s injunction in a filing on Thursday with the Court of Appeals for the District Court of Washington, D.C.

Albanese is a foreign national, who has not lived in the United States for a decade and whose speech in question was expressed outside the United States, making her ineligible for American free speech protection, according to Shumate.

The Justice Department also decried the sanctions being lifted due to claims from Albanese’s husband and daughter, who weren’t sanctioned but say that they were affected deeply. The latter two’s grievances “could easily be addressed by exempting them from the sanctions” without absolving Albanese, the department said.

“The injunction is both legally indefensible and overly broad,” it told the court.
Do what it takes to disarm Hamas, Gaza envoy to Board of Peace tells UN Security Council
Nickolay Mladenov, high representative for Gaza at the U.S.-backed Board of Peace, told the United Nations Security Council to “use every means at its disposal” to pressure Hamas to disarm.

Amid concern that the stalled effort to get the terror group to lay down its arms will leave Gaza’s recovery paralyzed, Mladenov, a former U.N. envoy for the Middle East peace process, addressed the Security Council on Thursday.

“There is no recovery in Gaza,” he said.

Mladenov briefed the council on the board’s first report on the state of affairs in Gaza, coming six months after Israel and Hamas signed on to a U.S.-brokered ceasefire plan.

The Board of Peace, established by U.S. President Donald Trump, was created to bring about a permanent cessation of hostilities in Gaza and to provide a roadmap for governance, recovery and reconstruction in the Strip following the two-year war between Israel and Hamas.

A central obstacle remains Hamas’s refusal to surrender its weapons, a condition Israel and the board have described as essential to long-term stability and the phased withdrawal of Israel Defense Forces troops from Gaza.

“Reconstruction financing will not follow where weapons have not been laid down,” Mladenov said. “No investment, no movement, no horizon.”

He warned that failure to advance the disarmament process could entrench Hamas’s rule over part of the enclave indefinitely.
Trump administration eyeing visa revocation of Palestinian UN delegation
Washington is threatening to revoke the visas of the Palestinian Authority delegation to the United Nations if the P.A. ambassador refuses to end his candidacy for the vice presidency of the U.N. General Assembly, Reuters reported on Thursday.

The U.S. administration views the intention of envoy Riyad Mansour to assume the General Assembly role as undermining U.S. President Donald Trump’s peace plan for the Gaza Strip, the report read.

“To be clear, we will hold the P.A. responsible if the Palestinian delegation ⁠does not withdraw its VPGA candidacy,” the report cited a message in a cable instructing the course of action for U.S. diplomats in Jerusalem.

Mansour had already withdrawn his candidacy for the presidency of the General Assembly following pressure from Washington.

However, if elected to the vice president role, he could still preside over General Assembly sessions, Reuters reported.

“Therefore, there is still a risk that the Palestinians could preside over G.A. sessions during UNGA81 [the U.N. General Assembly’s 81st annual high-level week in September] unless they withdraw from the race,” the report cited the cable as adding.

“In a worst-case scenario, the next PGA might assist the Palestinians in presiding over high-profile sessions related to the Middle East or during UNGA81 high-level week,” the cable read.

The election for the president and vice presidents of the General Assembly will be held on June 2.

A U.S. revocation of the Palestinian delegation’s visas would not be a first. On Aug. 29, the Trump administration revoked the visas of Palestinian Authority chief Mahmoud Abbas and around 80 other P.A. and PLO officials.
In Florida, Extremist Networks Are Hiding Behind Nonprofits
For one of us, this pattern is familiar. Florida Lieutenant Governor Jay Collins spent more than two decades as a U.S. Army Special Forces Green Beret. In the early stages before terrorist networks become visible as threats, he has consistently encountered their efforts at infrastructure building, starting with cultivating the appearance of legitimacy—through civic ties, institutional roles, and the legal protections that come with them. The presence comes first. By the time the threat becomes obvious, the structure is already in place.

In the case of the Islamic Community of Tampa, the details we document can be found in court records and state documents. Why hasn’t that record stopped the same individuals from re-establishing themselves and continuing to operate with all the legal benefits that nonprofit status provides?

The network hasn’t gone dormant. In 2021, CAIR Florida hosted Fariz at its annual gala, where he called his terrorism conviction “baseless,” and featured him in fundraising videos as a victim of government persecution. That same year, the Coalition for Civil Freedoms—whose Board of Directors is chaired by Fariz—granted $9,000 to the Islamic Community of Tampa. Meanwhile Al-Arian, deported to Turkey, has continued operating through CIGA, a think tank at Istanbul Zaim University, hosting Hamas official Osama Hamdan in 2024 and, in early 2025, a speaker sanctioned by the U.S. Treasury. The Tampa network and the Istanbul operation share the same leadership. While the legal address changed, the activity didn’t.

Enforcement is slow for good reason. Federal designations require due process. States face real constitutional limits, especially when religion and free speech are involved. The result is a gray zone that well-organized networks can and do exploit, sometimes for decades.

The SPLC scandal reveals what happens when a watchdog institution loses its integrity from within. The CAIR controversy shows what happens when governments keep funding and legitimizing groups with ties to terror-linked networks while treating investigations of those ties as bigotry. And the Tampa incident demonstrates what can occur when the system has no real means of acting, even when the record is established and clear. These failures reveal similar vulnerabilities.

The freedoms that make American civil society strong and worth defending can also be leveraged by people who don’t share our values. Fixing that problem doesn’t mean shredding these protections. It means getting better at making distinctions—and acting on them.

Congress should require enhanced transparency and review for tax-exempt organizations whose leaders, major donors, or grant recipients have been convicted of terrorism-related offenses, sanctioned by the Treasury Department, or identified in federal court records as tied to foreign terrorist organizations. This would not criminalize speech, religion, or association, nor would it punish unpopular views. It would simply recognize that nonprofit status and public funding are privileges, not rights.
Israeli Officials: As Long as Iran Regime Survives, Repeated Conflict Is Likely
A senior Israeli defense official told Ynet: "The war against Iran will be prolonged. As long as this regime does not fall, we are likely to face recurring rounds of fighting...in order to ensure that the nuclear and ballistic missile threat does not endanger the existence of the State of Israel."

"From Israel's perspective, this will not be the last round as long as this regime remains standing. It will be possible to hit Iran very hard, damage economic and military targets and symbols of government, and it will look like a clear victory in Western eyes."

"But from the Iranian perspective, as long as the regime survives, they will rebuild their military capabilities. Therefore, Israel will have to maintain intelligence and operational readiness for another return to fighting."
Rubio says Iran talks show ‘good signs,’ but Hormuz tolls would make deal ‘unfeasible’
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Thursday that there were “good signs” for a deal to end the war with Iran, but that an agreement would be “unfeasible” if Tehran pursues its plan to toll ships in the Strait of Hormuz. Israel, meanwhile, remained at the highest level of alert over the possibility that fighting could resume.

Rubio told reporters in Miami that while US President Donald Trump prefers diplomacy to war, there are “other options” if talks reach a dead end.

“The president’s preference is to do a good deal. That’s his preference. It’s always been his preference. If we can get a good deal done, that would be great,” Rubio said. “But if we can’t get a good deal, the president’s been clear he has other options.”

“I believe the Pakistanis will be traveling to Tehran today, so hopefully that’ll advance this further,” said Rubio, referring to a possible visit to Tehran on Thursday by Pakistan’s Army Chief Asim Munir, a key mediator.

“There are some good signs, but I don’t want to be overly optimistic,” Rubio said. “Let’s see what happens over the next few days.”

Asked about Iran’s scheme to impose tolls in the blockaded strait, Rubio said: “No one is in favor of a tolling system, it can’t happen, it would be unacceptable and it would make a diplomatic deal unfeasible.”

“It’s a threat to the world if they were to try to do that, and it’s completely illegal by the way,” he added.

Rubio also accused NATO allies of having gone “into hiding” while the US struck Iran’s ballistic missiles, even though the Islamic Republic possesses missiles that can reach Europe but not the US.

Trump was “not asking them to commit troops. He’s not asking them to send their fighter jets in. But they refuse to do anything,” Rubio said. “We were very upset about that.”


Republicans delay US House vote to halt Iran war that was on verge of passing
Republicans struggled yesterday to find the votes to dismiss legislation that would compel President Donald Trump to withdraw from the war with Iran, delaying planned votes on the matter into June.

The House had scheduled a vote on a war powers resolution, brought by Democrats, that would rein in Trump’s military campaign. But as it becomes clear that Republicans would not have the numbers to defeat the bill, GOP leaders decline to hold a vote on it.

Republicans are also working to ensure they have the votes to dismiss another war powers resolution in the Senate that advanced to a final vote earlier this week, when four GOP senators supported the resolution and three others were absent from the vote.

The actions by congressional leaders showed the increasing difficultly of maintaining political backing for Trump’s handling of the war. Rank-and-file Republicans are increasingly willing to defy the president over the conflict.
'Bibi's hair was on fire': Inside the call between Trump, Netanyahu on Iran ceasefire talks - Axios
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump had a difficult conversation on Tuesday about ceasefire talks, Axios reported on Wednesday.

Trump reportedly called Netanyahu on Tuesday to inform him that mediators were working on a "letter of intent" to end the war and launch a month-long period of negotiations, which would include matters such as Iran's nuclear program and opening the Strait of Hormuz.

Two Israeli sources stated that the two leaders were in clear disagreement about how to deal with Iran moving forward. One US source briefed on the call told Axios that "Bibi's hair was on fire after the call."

It is worth noting that Netanyahu has reportedly been worried during previous phases of negotiations. "Bibi is always concerned," one source told Axios.

The Axios report came as the US sent a new proposal to Iran through Pakistani mediators. Sources close to Iran's negotiating team told the Iranian semi-official news agency Tasnim that Tehran's mediators were reviewing the document, but nothing had been finalized yet.

Also on Wednesday, Trump told reporters that Iran and the US are "right on the borderline," between restarting the war and making a deal.

"If we don't get the right answer, it could happen very quickly. We have not got the right answer. It will have to be 100% good answers”, Trump said, adding that he would give a “few days” for talks.
Argentine ex-prosecutor charged with cover-up in 2015 death of AMIA bombing investigator
The former prosecutor who led the investigation into a mysterious 2015 death that unnerved Argentina’s Jewish community has been charged with concealing evidence in the case.

Viviana Fein was indicted on May 12 on charges of “aggravated concealment” over her handling of the investigation into the death of Alberto Nisman, a special prosecutor appointed to investigate the 1994 bombing of the AMIA Jewish community center in Buenos Aires that killed 85 people.

On January 18, 2015, Nisman was found dead in his Buenos Aires apartment with a bullet hole above his right ear, having been shot at point-blank range. His body was discovered hours before he was scheduled to present evidence before Argentinian lawmakers, accusing then-president Cristina Fernández de Kirchner and other senior officials of allegedly covering up Iran’s role in the AMIA attack.

At the time, Fein declared Nisman’s death a suicide, but in May 2016, she slightly amended her view, saying that he may have been forced to kill himself. Then, in 2017, forensic investigators issued a report stating that Nisman was assassinated. Jewish institutions have also maintained that he was murdered.

Under the Argentine Penal Code, aggravated concealment applies to a person who did not participate in a crime, but who later helped perpetrators cover their tracks. In the indictment against Fein, Judge Julián Ercolini said the former prosecutor failed to properly preserve the crime scene at Nisman’s apartment, and let dozens of people enter and exit the apartment without proper controls, potentially contaminating evidence and compromising the investigation.

The controversy surrounding the handling of the original crime scene has persisted for years. Judicial investigations and expert reports described the apartment as chaotic in the hours after Nisman’s death, with allegations that evidence may have been mishandled or destroyed.
Germany charges Dane in alleged Iranian plot to kill Jewish leader, three others
Germany has charged a Danish national with participating in an Iranian-backed plot to murder the head of the country’s largest Jewish organization and three other targets, federal prosecutors said on Thursday.

The suspect, identified only as Ali S. under German privacy laws, was arrested in Denmark in June 2025. An alleged accomplice, Afghan national Tawab M., was arrested in Denmark in November. Prosecutors filed indictments against both men in Hamburg state court on May 7.

Ali S. was charged with acting as an agent for a foreign intelligence service, engaging in sabotage-related espionage and attempted participation in murder and arson. Tawab M. was charged with attempted complicity in murder.

According to prosecutors, Ali S. worked for the intelligence arm of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and maintained close contact with the IRGC’s Quds Force, which oversees overseas operations. Investigators said he was tasked in early 2025 with gathering intelligence on Josef Schuster, president of the Central Council of Jews in Germany; Volker Beck, president of the German-Israeli Society and a former Bundestag member; and two Jewish grocers in Berlin.

“All this served for the preparation of assassination and arson attacks in Germany,” prosecutors stated.

Prosecutors said Ali S. scouted locations in Berlin and sought accomplices to carry out the attacks. By May 2025, he was in contact with Tawab M., who allegedly offered to procure a weapon for an unidentified third person tasked with killing Beck. German authorities said Tawab M. had previously been involved in acquiring weapons and explosive-device components in Denmark.

Following the arrest of Ali S., the German foreign ministry summoned Iran’s ambassador in Berlin. The Iranian embassy denied the allegations, calling them “unfounded and dangerous.”
Italian teenager re-arrested for recruiting for terrorism
A 15-year-old teenager was re-arrested in Florence for recruiting for the purpose of international terrorism after having previously been arrested for the same crime, said Italian state police on Wednesday.

According to a statement regarding the arrest, the teen had declared himself “ready to act” and received instructions on how to choose a target for a terror attack in chats with individuals linked to Islamist extremism.

The suspect was originally arrested for similar actions months ago and was held in a community detention center until he was released on probation.

Suspect began engaging with terror-linked individuals after release
Shortly after his release, he once again began interacting with social media profiles used by members of Daesh, a jihadist terrorist organization active mainly in Syria and Iraq, Italian authorities stated.

Italy’s Committee for Strategic Anti-Terrorism Analysis and the Central Directorate of the Prevention Police had been actively monitoring the suspect and noticed his online activity.

Florence’s General Investigations and Special Operations Division was then notified of the activity, and the suspect’s phone was seized by law enforcement.

The phone was analyzed, and information found on the device confirmed that the suspect had repeatedly contacted individuals linked to Islamist extremism through social messaging platforms, leading to his rearrest.
US used over half its THAAD interceptors defending Israel during Iran war — report
The US reportedly used up more than half of its inventory of THAAD anti-missile interceptors while defending Israel from Iranian attacks during the recent war.

According to The Washington Post on Thursday, the United States used over 200 THAAD interceptors to shoot down missiles bound for Israel. It also launched more than 100 SM-3 and SM-6 interceptors to defend Israel, which itself used fewer than 100 Arrow interceptors and around 90 from the David Sling’s system.

A US official told the newspaper that if fighting renews with Iran, the US will likely need to use even more interceptors defending Israel because of a decision by the latter to send some missile defense batteries for maintenance.

“Israel is not capable of fighting and winning wars on its own, but nobody actually knows this, because they never see the back end,” said a US official quoted in the report.

The Pentagon denied to The Washington Post that there is any issue of burden sharing with Israel, saying, “Ballistic missile interceptors are just one tool in a vast network of systems and capabilities.”

The Israeli Embassy in Washington said in response that “the US has no other partner with the military willingness, readiness, shared interests and capabilities of Israel.”
US sanctions Lebanese officials, Iranian diplomat over ties to Hezbollah
The Trump administration on Thursday imposed sanctions against eight Lebanese nationals and an Iranian diplomat for allegedly obstructing efforts to disarm Hezbollah, the Iran-backed militant group that wields significant political and military influence in Lebanon.

The U.S. Department of the Treasury stated on Thursday that the individuals sanctioned include officials embedded in Lebanon’s parliament, military and security services who “seek to preserve the Iran-backed terrorist group’s influence over key Lebanese state institutions.”

“Hezbollah’s continued militant activity and coercive influence over the Lebanese state undermine the Lebanese government’s ability to assert its authority over state institutions and disarm the terrorist group,” the department stated.

The action comes as U.S.-mediated talks between Israel and Lebanon, focused in part on Hezbollah’s disarmament, are expected to hold a fourth round in early June.

Among those designated were two members of Lebanon’s security apparatus. Col. Samir Hamadi, identified by Treasury as chief of the Lebanese Armed Forces Intelligence Directorate’s Dahiyah branch, and Brig. Gen. Khattar Nasser al-Din of the Internal Security Forces’ General Security Directorate, were accused of sharing intelligence with Hezbollah during the ongoing regional conflict.

Also sanctioned were Mohamed Abdel-Mottaleb Fanich, a former Lebanese minister and lawmaker described as heading Hezbollah’s executive council; Hezbollah lawmakers Hassan Fadlallah, Ibrahim al-Moussawi and Hussein al-Hajj Hassan; and Amal Movement security officials Ahmad Asaad Baalbaki and Ali Ahmad Safawi. Treasury said Safawi has directed attacks against Israel.
Poll: Most Lebanese Support a Peace Agreement with Israel, except for Shi'ites
The majority of Lebanese want to see a peace agreement with Israel, according to a new poll by the International Information Company in Lebanon, first published by Lebanon's Al-Jadeed on Monday.

The poll, conducted on April 28-May 5, found that 84% of Druze supported a peace agreement with Israel, followed by 77% of Maronites and 72% of Orthodox Christians.

Lebanon's Muslim population was less supportive. 52% of Sunnis wanted a deal, while 92% of Shi'ites opposed such a move.

94% of Shi'ites and 74% of Sunnis opposed normalizing ties with Jerusalem, while 58% of Maronites, 49% of Orthodox Christians, and 79% of Druze said they would support normalization.

58% of Lebanese supported taking away Hizbullah's military capabilities, while 34% were opposed.


Call me Back: Mossad, Ahmadinejad, and the plan to topple Iran’s regime - with Ronen Bergman
Did the U.S. and Israel plan to replace Iran’s regime with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad?!

A new New York Times investigation has revealed an astonishing alleged U.S.-Israeli plan behind the war with Iran: not just strikes on nuclear sites and missile capabilities, but a broader attempt at regime change, together with none other than Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Ronen Bergman joins Dan to explain how the plan was built, why Ahmadinejad became part of it, why it collapsed before it could fully begin, and what it means that the story is coming out while the war is still unresolved.

In this episode:
04:36 - Ronen’s first reaction to the Ahmadinejad story
05:54 - How Israel’s goal shifted from strikes to regime change
07:21 - Why the 12-day war left the core Iran problem unresolved
08:21 - What the Mossad plan was supposed to do in the first 100 hours
12:36 - Why Ahmadinejad was considered as an internal alternative
22:42 - The strike that was meant to free Ahmadinejad
28:24 - The plan for Kurdish forces to enter Iran, and why it never moved forward
30:48 - Who benefits from this story going public


Amid Ben Gvir furor, Israel deports all 430 foreign flotilla activists, holds one Israeli
Israel on Thursday deported all of the approximately 430 international activists who were detained at sea in the latest flotilla attempt to break Israel’s naval blockade of Gaza, the Foreign Ministry said, a day after National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir caused widespread outrage after filming himself taunting the bound, kneeling activists.

“Israel will not permit any breach of the lawful naval blockade on Gaza,” the Foreign Ministry said. Turkey sent charter flights to collect the detainees from the Ramon airport near Eilat.

One participant, an Israeli citizen, was still being held in custody pending a hearing at the Ashkelon Magistrate’s Court, the Adalah legal rights group said, naming her as Zohar Regev.

Adalal said the charges against Regev were “absurd,” noting that she was being held on for offenses including “‘illegal entry into Israel,’ ‘unlawful stay,’ and for an attempt to break the blockade on Gaza.”

The legal group called the accusations “unfounded and contradictory” and noted Regev was “forcefully abducted” in international waters and “brought into Israeli territory entirely against her will.”

A first group of deported foreign activists were seen inside the VIP terminal at Istanbul airport, as a crowd of supporters carrying Palestinian flags gathered to welcome them.

Upon arrival at Istanbul airport, one of the activists shouted “the Palestinian people are not alone!” as he emerged from the terminal.

“We’ve been tortured, we’ve been beaten, we’ve been arrested in international waters, but we won’t give up. We will return. Palestine will be free from the river to the sea,” he said to cheers from the crowd.
Stephen Pollard: Ben-Gvir’s despicable taunting of detainees is not just to rile his base – he wants to isolate Israel and win votes
Ben Gvir is especially dangerous to Israel not just because of who he is, and what it says about the Israeli government that he is the national security minister. The danger he poses to Israel is even greater than that because his very goal is the sort of condemnation that has been widespread since the video first circulated. Israel has become inured to such statements in recent years because the usual suspects (including, one has to say, Britain) issue pro-forma condemnations even when Israel needs to be supported. But while those same usual suspects are of course condemning the Ben-Gvir video, it is nonetheless different. When the likes of Georgia Meloni, who has been a supporter of Israel’s right and need to defend itself from terror, joins them, it shows how Ben-Gvir’s behaviour is, on its own appalling terms, succeeding.

The idea that there is some actual security and deterrence purpose to his behaviour in the video is a red herring. Far from deterring future flotillas, both he and the flotilla members have a perverse parity of interest in more coming. Ben-Gvir revels in the outrage generated by his response to their arrival, and they revel in being able to show the world how Israel is the villain they paint it as. Ben Gvir is a godsend to the antisemites and "antizionists”. If they tried to construct an Israeli minister designed to repel the world and to win over moderates to their cause, they could hardly come up with a better creation than the national security minister. Rather than staying home in future to avoid such treatment, his behaviour incentivises them to return.

That is why he is so very dangerous to Israel – far more so than the mere fact of his views. Israel has every right to detain and then deport those who threaten its security. Other governments might make pro forma protests, but Israel can ignore such protests as the usual hot air, as would any government that is committed to the safety of its citizens. But Ben-Gvir’s behaviour turns what should be a run-of-the-mill detain and deport operation into an international outrage, and gives the detainees the patina of legitimacy. He plays into the hands of Israel’s enemies – and does so, as we have seen, quite deliberately.

In this context, it is at the same time both important and bizarre that Israel’s Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, should criticise Ben-Gvir’s actions as “not in line with Israel’s values and norms.” Indeed so. Ben-Gvir repulses the overwhelming majority of Israelis. As foreign minister Gideon Sa’ar put it, “you are not the face of Israel”.

But Ben-Gvir did not become national security minister by accident. He was appointed by Netanyahu, breaking a convention that lasted since Israel’s independence in 1948 that no figures such as Ben-Gvir and Smotrich would ever be brought into government for one reason alone: so that Netanyahu could become and then remain prime minister. He needed their votes.

If we are to criticise Ben-Gvir’s presence in the government, one man is to blame: Benjamin Netanyahu. It is all very well him criticising his minister’s actions, but if it wasn’t for Netanyahu, Ben-Gvir would be no more than a racist street thug representing a fringe party in the Knesset. If Ben-Gvir is damaging Israel’s national security by his actions – and he is – then one man is blame for that.
David Horovitz: Netanyahu needs to fire Ben Gvir after his flotilla provocation, but of course he won’t
For Israel, it was a hugely damaging spectacle, predictably igniting a global firestorm, with real consequences for Israel’s already dire international reputation, practical potential legal consequences for Israeli soldiers abroad, and the potential to still further raise hostility to all Israelis, Jews and those who identify with Israel.

As this writer and so many others who care for Israel have stressed repeatedly, Netanyahu should never have legitimized Ben Gvir, much less partnered with him in a coalition, and least of all granted him an acutely sensitive role in the governance of the country.

Netanyahu managed a mild condemnation of Ben Gvir’s performance: “The way that Minister Ben Gvir dealt with the flotilla activists is not in line with Israel’s values and norms,” the prime minister said. But appointed by Netanyahu, Ben Gvir has been assiduously corrupting Israel’s values and norms for the past three-and-a-half years.

Ben Gvir is “not fit” to serve as a minister, Netanyahu correctly stated in 2021. He should, of course, never have shifted from that position. He should, of course, have fired Ben Gvir long ago. And he should, of course, fire Ben Gvir now.

But although Ben Gvir is exactly the same racist thug he always was, Netanyahu is not the Netanyahu of 2021, who was sometimes still capable of prioritizing Israel’s well-being over his own political needs.
Chief Rabbi condemns Ben-Gvir video
Chief Rabbi Sir Ephraim Mirvis has condemned a video shared by Israeli security minister Itamar Ben-Gvir showing detained activists, as the UK summoned Israel’s most senior diplomat in Britain over the “inflammatory” footage.

Sir Ephraim posted online: “I have rarely seen the Jewish world so united in revulsion than in its response to this shameful display.

“Such conduct is the very antithesis of our core Jewish values and an awful Chillul Hashem (desecration of God’s name).”

The Government has also expressed concern over the detention conditions depicted – what appeared to be a makeshift detention area at Ashdod, on Israel’s coast – and has demanded an explanation from the Israeli authorities.


Ben Gvir, the Flotilla, and the Difference Between Strength and Theater
The activists wanted a global PR event. They were given one.

There’s something a lot of people on our side still do not understand about modern activism:
Marshall McLuhan famously said “the medium is the message”. This is the pro-Hamas version: The spectacle IS the objective.

The flotilla people were not trying to militarily defeat Israel with a yacht full of influencers, activists and emotionally unstable livestream addicts.

They were trying to create content. That’s the operation. The boat is just the camera tripod.

So when I joked that Ben Gvir should be locked in a basement until further notice, some people reacted as though I had personally begun loading rockets into Gaza myself.

“No! We must humiliate them!” “No! We must show strength!” “No! We must make them afraid!”

Habibis. Different enemies require different weapons. You do not fight influencer activists the same way you fight terrorists.

Strength is not measured by how satisfying the clip feels on X for six hours while your followers reply with fire emojis and “BASED.”

Strength is measured by whether the enemy achieved their strategic objective.

And in this case? They absolutely did.

Think about what these flotilla activists actually wanted:
Viral footage
International outrage
Israeli overreaction
Global condemnation
Headlines portraying themselves as heroic freedom fighters
Emotional footage for documentaries narrated by Susan Sarandon in a scarf
Which is exactly what happened.





Buy EoZ's books  on Amazon!

Reclaiming the Covenant on America's 250th (May 2026)

"He's an Anti-Zionist Too!" cartoon book (December 2024)

PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism (February 2022)

    

 

 

at