Search

⁠⁠Israel is living rent-free in millions of people's heads who have never been there and know hardly anything about it apart from some propagandistic slogans and memes. That's the real "occupation" that must end. "Condemning Israel is cheap virtue. It costs the activist #Israel #Propaganda #Occupation #IL

À l’Assemblée nationale, la justice à géométrie variable tourne à plein régime. Un retraité de 75 ans crie « On en a marre de vous ! » depuis les tribunes. Résultat : poursuite, tribunal, 120 jours-amende à 8 euros (soit 960 euros). Le procureur avait requis quatre mois de prison avec sursis et 1 500 euros d’amende. Il a osé déranger les élus. C’est madame le grande prêtresse de la vertu qui a poursuivit le retraité. Quelques semaines plus tard, le clan Traoré orchestre un bordel séditieux : irruption, slogans hurlés, personnel forcé d’intervenir, quasi-chute par-dessus la rambarde… en plein vote sur la présomption de légitime défense des forces de l’ordre. Et là ? Yaël Braun-Pivet, gardienne autoproclamée de la vertu républicaine, minimise, se plaint de la médiatisation (« pénibles, ces journalistes qui racontent ce qu’ils voient »), interdit l’accès aux tribunes pour un an… et classe sans suite. Aucune plainte. Aucune poursuite. Deux poids, deux mesures. Un anonyme prend une amende. Une figure médiatique séditieuse qui insulte les institutions et crie que la police tue , soutenue par le parti Antisémite et Anti France LFI, bénéficie de l’indulgence. Quand le temple de la démocratie applique la loi selon qui vous êtes, ce n’est plus une institution. C’est un théâtre d’hypocrisie. La République n’a pas besoin de « gardienne de la vertu ». Elle a besoin d’égalité réelle devant les règles. Sinon, elle n’est plus qu’un décor.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ C’est une farce. Et Braun-Pivet en est la metteuse en scène. #Justice #Égalité #République

| JULY 2026 | The Guard State How the largest Arab nation became a security contractor at the gates of its own people By Adham Hasanin Egyptian journalist and political writer, based in the Netherlands In June 2025, hundreds of activists from forty countries landed at Cairo airport. Doctors from France, lawyers from Australia, students from the United States, pensioners from the Netherlands. They carried no weapons and no banned slogans; they carried backpacks, walking shoes, and a single intention: to march from Arish to the Rafah crossing — entirely on Egyptian soil — to demand that food be allowed through to a people starving behind the gate. Not one of them reached Rafah. More than two hundred were detained before the march could begin. Around five hundred foreign nationals were deported from airports, hotels, and checkpoints. Passports were confiscated, activists were pulled out of downtown Cairo cafés, and the Global March to Gaza was cancelled on 16 June without taking its first step. And the world watched. This was no secret operation in a dark basement; it happened in the open, documented by the deportees’ own phone cameras, carried by every international news agency. The world watched an Arab state arrest Europeans, Americans, and Africans for wanting to walk towards Palestine. A state guarding the gate of a siege — from the side that was supposed to be the side of rescue. Hold that image, because it is the key to everything that follows. This was not an aberration in Egyptian policy, nor an isolated security decision. It is the function — the complete function around which the Egyptian state has been redefined over the past decade, and which it is time to call by its proper name: the Guard State. I. The Name — What Do We Mean by the Guard State? Political economy has long described states that live off the rent of their location rather than the production of their people. But what has crystallised in Egypt over the past decade goes beyond traditional geographic rent — the Suez Canal, say — into something far graver: the conversion of sovereignty itself into a commodity for hire. The Guard State does not sell its location; it sells its function. It collects its wages not for what it produces, but for what it prevents: it prevents the refugee from reaching Europe, the activist from reaching Gaza, its own people from reaching politics, and the resistance’s weapons from reaching their destination. Four gates, guarded by a single machine, whose wages are paid in loans, deposits, and perpetually renewed rescue packages. This is not a rhetorical metaphor; it is an economic structure with numbers attached. When the Egyptian economy collapsed in 2024, it was rescued not by productive reform but by a single deal whose subject was location: Ras el-Hekma — thirty-five billion dollars for a stretch of coastline. And whenever negotiations with the IMF stall, the tranches are unlocked by explicit European pressure whose subject is migration: nine billion euros from the European Union in the 2024 “Strategic Partnership,” whose own documents place “migration management” at its core. Europe does not pay Egypt to prosper. It pays Egypt to guard. Thus the model is complete: income in exchange for prevention, external legitimacy in exchange for guarding, and international silence about domestic tyranny in exchange for keeping the gates controlled. To see how the model works on the ground, consider the bloodiest gate of all: the gate of Gaza. II. The Gaza Gate — The Guard Who Is Himself Searched The first paradox must be nailed down with facts: Egypt is not a sovereign guard of its own crossing; it is a searched guard. Egyptian relief trucks — ninety-two thousand food parcels in a single convoy this month — are subject to Israeli inspection before entering the Strip: from Egyptian soil, through a crossing that bears an Egyptian name. The state that guards the gate does not hold its key. It owns the threshold, but not the door. Then the October 2025 truce added a new layer to the function. Under the fifteen-point roadmap sponsored by the international envoy together with the “guarantor states” — Egypt foremost among them — Cairo is to train the civilian police force that will replace Hamas in administering the Strip, under the slogan of “one authority, one law, one weapon.” Let us call things by their names: the state that could not — or would not — deliver a loaf of bread without Israeli permission is now qualifying to graduate the security apparatus that will oversee the disarming of the resistance. From guarding the siege to administering what comes after the siege — a promotion within the same project. And meanwhile, what is happening behind the guarded gate? Since the truce, more than one thousand one hundred Palestinians have been killed by Israeli fire — the latest, just two days ago, a ten-year-old boy named Motaz Abu Shaar, carried to his grave in Khan Younis by his mother, Warda. A United Nations commission of inquiry has concluded that Israel is “deliberately targeting children in an ongoing genocide.” This is what the guarantors’ official language calls a “ceasefire.” What meaning is left in the word “guarantor”? A guarantor that the gate stays firmly shut — however high the dead pile up behind it. III. The Mediterranean Gate — The Guard Europe Pays For The second gate faces north. Since 2016, Cairo has boasted — through its officials at every European forum — that “not a single irregular migration boat has departed from Egyptian shores.” This is very nearly true. But the forbidden question is: at what political price has this “efficiency” become an instrument of mutual blackmail? Europe — which condemns Egypt’s human rights record in its parliamentary resolutions — is the same Europe that signed the nine-billion-euro partnership, and the same Europe that stays silent about sixty thousand political prisoners because the alternative, in its calculations, is boats that never stop. And Cairo understands the game and has mastered it: whenever human rights pressure intensifies, the official discourse turns up the volume on “Egypt hosts millions of refugees” and “the last line of defence.” The result is a perfect structure of mutual blackmail: Europe buys its conscience’s silence, the regime sells its location, and the people — Egyptian and refugee alike — are the commodity in the transaction. The democracies that lecture on values are financing the guard who keeps the victims from knocking on their doors. This is not passing hypocrisy; it is a structural partnership in the Guard State model — one that makes Brussels and Berlin shareholders in everything this state produces, from domestic repression to external siege. IV. The Interior Gate — Guarding the People Against Politics But the most dangerous gate is not on any border; it is inside. The Guard State cannot perform its external function unless it first guards an internal gate: the people’s gate to politics. The function requires a people that does not ask: why are we guarding the siege of our brothers? Why are our trucks searched on our own soil? Why are guests deported for coming to walk in peace? To guarantee the question is never asked, the largest silencing machine in the country’s history was built: sixty thousand prisoners of opinion, a press ranked 166th out of 180 worldwide, and a state security case number waiting for anyone who writes. I write these lines from experience, not from reading reports. When I continued writing from my Dutch exile, the machine reached me across continents: accounts shut down by coordinated mass-reporting campaigns, documented threats, a family harassed inside Egypt as leverage — and my name entered into Case 1282 of 2024, not for any act I committed, but for opinions written from free European soil. This is not a personal complaint; it is a job description: the Guard State guards even beyond its borders, because the free word — wherever it is written — threatens the entire contract of guardianship. The logic is perfectly self-consistent: a regime that sells “stability” abroad cannot tolerate a voice revealing that the stability on offer is the stillness of graveyards. This is why the arrest of the foreign activists in June 2025 was inevitable, not incidental: a peaceful march reaching Rafah would have revealed, before the world’s cameras, that the gate opens when it is wanted open — and that the one keeping it shut is a partner, not a mediator. V. What Has Egypt Lost? — The Guard’s Bill An apologist might argue: what is the harm? A state monetising its location as Norway monetises its oil. The answer lies in the essential difference: Norway sells a resource; Egypt leases its will. And the difference between the two is the difference between trade and bondage. Let us tally what Egypt has paid for this model, in bare facts. It lost its water sovereignty: the Renaissance Dam was completed and filled without the state — owner of “the largest defence headquarters in the world” — daring anything beyond statements of concern; for the guard does not make trouble for the international order that employs him. It lost its regional standing: in the Iran–America war halted just weeks ago, Cairo was neither party nor mediator nor even consultant — Pakistan brokered the deal, while Egypt absorbed the economic shrapnel of Hormuz’s closure like a bystander caught in a battle whose parties it does not know. It lost its place in the conscience of its nation: the state that liberated its land in 1973 and led the Arab world for a century has become, in the eyes of the Arab street from the Atlantic to the Gulf, the gatekeeper of the siege. This loss, specifically, no loan or deposit can repay — because it is the only capital that cannot be printed. And it lost — here is the crux — the very national security in whose name the guarding is justified. The model proved its fragility at the moment of testing: when Israel feared an Iranian response last year, it cut off Egypt’s gas by unilateral decision within hours. The guard who believed himself a partner discovered he was merely a hireling whose wages stop the moment danger arrives. VI. The Alternative Is Not a Slogan — It Is the Recovery of the Original Function I will not close with an essay on “the solution lies in Arab unity”; worn-out words kill more surely than silence. The alternative is specific, and it begins with redefining the function. The state is not a guard; the state is the agent of its people’s will. Every foreign policy not derived from that will is — by definition — functional servitude, however it is wrapped in the language of wisdom and moderation. And the Egyptian will is known and needs no referendum: no people in this region accepts that its country serve as warden of the siege of Gaza, or as Europe’s border post. Practically, the recovery begins with three measurable steps. Open the Rafah crossing fully and sovereignly, by purely Egyptian decision — that alone would overturn the equation of the siege. Break the negotiating bondage by linking any cooperation on migration to concrete European positions on Palestine, not statements of concern. And open the interior gate — release the prisoners and lift the hand from the written word — because a state that fears an article will never dare face an occupier. I know the current regime will do none of this; guarding is its founding contract and its financial artery. But this article is not written for the regime. It is written for memory, and for the generation that will inherit the gates — so that it knows that what is presented to it today as “the fate of geography” is no fate at all. It is an employment contract, signed by a regime without a mandate from its people. And contracts, however long they run, end when one of their parties does. And the world — I return to where I began — is a witness that requires no further proof. It watched the deportees at Cairo airport; it watched the searched trucks; it watched Warda Abu Shaar carry her son to his grave behind a firmly guarded gate. The question is no longer: what is happening? The only question left is: who dares to name it? This article is a naming. Adham Hasanin is an Egyptian journalist and political writer based in the Netherlands, covering Arab and European political affairs.

A FIFA não punirá a Argentina pelo cântico dos jogadores sobre as Ilhas Malvinas, no vestiário, após a vitória por 3 a 2 contra o Egito. Embora o regulamento da entidade máxima do futebol (FIFA) proíba a exibição de slogans ou o entoamento de gritos de caráter político em seus torneios, a seleção argentina não receberá nenhuma punição. A guerra das Malvinas durou 74 dias e resultou na morte de 649 soldados argentinos e 255 militares britânicos. Via: @DailyMail 📽️@AFASeleccionEN #FIFA #Argentina #Malvinas

Le régime iranien semble préparer un plan pour assassiner Donald Trump, en réponse aux tensions croissantes entre l'Iran et les États-Unis, intensifiées par des slogans de haine et des menaces proférées lors des funérailles de l'ancien guide suprême Ali Khamenei. #Iran #DonaldTrump #Menace

📣 I dagarna avslöjades att V skanderat ”hela Malmö hatar polisen”. Jag kan nu visa att V:s Malmöordförande Tove Karnerud på nationaldagen publicerade en bild av den svenska flaggan nedklottrad med slogans som ”Kuken”, ”Fuck Tidö” och ”Vägra fascismen”. Vilket annat demokratiskt parti skulle acceptera att en ledande företrädare skändar den svenska flaggan med obsceniteter och hånar polisen? V är ett sjukt parti som sedan länge passerat anständighetens gräns. #Malmö #Sverige #Demokrati

La présidente du Parlement européen, Roberta Metsola, a fermement condamné le comportement inacceptable de certains eurodéputés de l'extrême droite ayant scandé des slogans racistes lors d'une séance plénière, affirmant que cela ne reflète ni l'esprit de l'assemblée ni les valeurs européennes, et promettant que des mesures appropriées seraient prises pour faire respecter les normes de conduite. #ParlementEuropéen #Racisme #RobertaMetsola

https://t.co/gpu9tkuNXC "Voor een hoge vaccinatiegraad moest het netjes gaan - topambtenaar VWS verhoord" Voor een zo hoog mogelijke vaccinatiegraad was alles geoorloofd: lockdowns, avondklok, verkettering en discriminatie van 'ongevaccineerden' en zelfs de vervolging van huisartsen door minister van Volksgezondheid Hugo de Jonge. Bijna alles werd daaraan ondergeschikt gemaakt. Informed Consent – de plicht van elke arts en één van de pijlers van de artseneed – werd terzijde geschoven. Een simpele ‘gezondheidsverklaring’, ingevuld door de persoon die zijn prik kwam halen zelf, was voldoende in de onpersoonlijke GGD-prikstraten. Huisartsen die hun patiënten wel informeerden over mogelijke bijwerkingen, Informed Consent dus, werden door de Inspectie voor de Volksgezondheid vervolgd. Zulke artsen werden immers gezien als obstakel voor de vaccinatiecampagne en de vaccinatiegraad. ‘Veilig en effectief’ en ‘je doet het voor een ander’ waren de slogans. 'Ongevaccineerden' werden afgeschilderd als egoïstische freeriders die de IC’s overbelastten. Alsof er niet jarenlang is bezuinigd op de zorg en alsof er sinds Corona ook maar één extra IC-bed bij is gekomen. De media deden volop mee: dezelfde outlets die campagne voerden met ‘Ik stroop mijn mouw op’ zetten 'ongevaccineerden' weg als gevaar voor de samenleving. Hoeveel van de zoekgeraakte 5,1 miljard euro bij het ministerie van VWS ging eigenlijk naar die campagnes en naar de GGD-test- en prikstraten? Want de IC is met niet één bed opgeschaald. Ook wetenschappelijk onderzoek naar de veiligheid van de vaccins werd ondergeschikt gemaakt aan de vaccinatiegraad. Het regende al vroeg meldingen van (ernstige) bijwerkingen bij Lareb en RIVM (zoals bleek uit WOB-documenten), maar de bevolking mocht dat niet weten. Dat zou de vaccinatiegraad maar kunnen schaden. Eerlijk gezegd kijk ik nauwelijks naar de verhoren van de parlementaire enquête Corona. Ik verdraag de gezichten van Rutte, Grapperhaus en De Jonge niet. Het voelt als één grote witwasoperatie waarin de daders zelf hun krokodillentranen mogen huilen en in de slachtofferrol kruipen. Terwijl de echte slachtoffers worden genegeerd: mensen met prikschade, ondernemers die failliet gingen door de lockdowns, en mensen die familie en vrienden kwijtraakten omdat ze zich niet wilden laten testen of prikken. Er is ongelooflijk veel schade aangericht, vooral bij jonge mensen. Het was al bekend dat het coronavirus voor kinderen en jongeren nauwelijks gevaarlijk was en dat zij de prik niet nodig hadden. Toch werd de hele bevolking vanaf 12 jaar gevaccineerd met een nieuw mRNA-product waarvan de lange-termijngevolgen onbekend waren. Inmiddels zijn veel meer bijwerkingen bekend – juist doordat zo veel mensen zijn geprikt. Alleen maar voor een zo hoog mogelijke vaccinatiegraad. Het is gekmakend dat dit kon gebeuren. We hebben niet voor niets Informed Consent als plicht in de artseneed. Maar ja, directeuren van VWS en RIVM en ministers hebben doorgaans geen medische kennis. En dan krijg je dit, dat de vaccinatiegraad een soort van heilig wordt verklaard en dat alles, welzijn en gezondheid en de eed, ervoor moet wijken. Waardeert u wat ik schrijf, dan kunt u me backen via https://t.co/5EmgfuiUho #Vaccinatiegraad #InformedConsent #Volksgezondheid

Boodschap aan de boeren. Ik capituleer beste boeren @NoFarmsNoFoods. Want ik kan jullie gepruts niet meer aanzien. Als het gaat om actievoeren, maar zeker als het gaat om actiecommunicatie. Ik zal jullie vertellen waarom "No farmers, No food" een ronduit slechte en zelfs schadelijke slogan is. En ik zal de wegplaveien naar iets nieuws. Spelling is letterlijk betoveren. Je cast een spell. "No farmers. No food" heeft een dubbel negatief als inhoud. En dus een dubbel negatieve uitwerking. Je verklaart/proclameert jezelf letterlijk dood met "No Farmers" . En het einde van het voedsel met "No Food". Jullie vooronderstellen een denkproces bij de mensen dat er helemaal niet is. Mensen denken oh... "no more farmers. Oh no more food". Wat naar. En zelfs dat niet, omdat deze slagan een platgetreden pad is. De brug naar "en dus moeten de Nederlandse boeren blijven", wordt helemaal niet gelegd. Jullie moeten af van het negatief! En een slogan laten maken, die jullie helpt in plaats van de grond in trapt. Voorbeeld. Let op dit zijn geen slogans. Dit is de fase ervoor. "Dutch farmers make/produce your/ your baby's/ kids milk/ food". Your food? Made by Dutch farmers. Of als je toch een negatieve approach wil, doe het dan keihard en compromisloos... "Without Dutch farmers, your kids wil starve." Dat maakt in ieder geval de tongen los. Dat dwingt de aanvaller in het defensief. En dan zijn we er nog niet. Want jullie zijn Nederlandse boeren. Door een buitenlandse slogan hanteren, zet je direct de mensen op het denkspoor... "No farmers. No food, except from abroad." "Nederlandse boeren zijn helemaal niet nodig, want voedsel komt uit de hele wereld." Daarom moet een slogan voor Nederlandse boeren Nederlands zijn. Deze slogan die jullie nu voeren is schadelijk en gevaarlijk. Het is een energy killer. Depressief en onvermijdelijk. Onderschat nooit de macht van het woord boeren. Joh 1:1. Je kunt me altijd bellen. Ik doe het gratis voor jullie. Mits jullie actievoeren eindelijk serieus nemen. This is my gift to you. Doe ermee wat je wilt. #Boeren #Voedsel #Communicatie

Une enquête a été ouverte à Rodez (Aveyron) après la diffusion sur les réseaux sociaux d'une vidéo montrant des jeunes scandant des slogans racistes, appelant à l'instauration de Marine Le Pen au pouvoir et à des violences contre les Arabes, provoquant l'indignation de plusieurs responsables politiques. #Racisme #Enquête #Rodez

Des milliers de personnes ont manifesté à Paris le 21 juin 2026 contre le racisme et l'extrême droite, à l'appel de La France insoumise, marchant sous une chaleur intense et portant des slogans antifascistes, avant un concert organisé pour la Fête de la musique. #Racisme #LaFranceInsoumise #Égalité

Die Schweiz plant ein Verbot von Nazi-Symbolen in der Öffentlichkeit, einschließlich Gesten, Grußformeln, Flaggen, Slogans und Tätowierungen, da diese Symbole einer menschenverachtenden Ideologie entsprechen, und ein Gesetzesentwurf dazu gilt als gesichert, mit Geldstrafen von 200 Schweizer Franken bei Verstößen. #NaziSymbole #Verbot #Schweiz

Quando o Banco Central falha em controlar a inflação, quem paga a conta é o povo. Quando o governo falha em cuidar das contas públicas, quem paga a conta é o povo. Quando Banco Central e governo falham ao mesmo tempo, o resultado é previsível: mais inflação, juros mais altos, menos investimentos, menos empregos e menos oportunidades para as famílias brasileiras. A inflação não é apenas um indicador econômico. Ela corrói silenciosamente o salário do trabalhador, reduz o poder de compra das famílias, encarece os alimentos, o aluguel e os serviços essenciais. É um imposto cruel, que atinge principalmente aqueles que têm menos condições de se proteger. Governar exige coragem para enfrentar a realidade, e não para escondê-la. Os problemas do Brasil não serão resolvidos com discursos, slogans ou soluções improvisadas. Precisamos encará-los de frente, com responsabilidade, transparência e compromisso com as futuras gerações. Não existe prosperidade duradoura construída sobre déficits permanentes, gastos descontrolados e inflação elevada. O caminho para um Brasil mais forte passa pela responsabilidade fiscal. Um governo que gasta melhor e gasta menos onde há desperdício abre espaço para reduzir a carga tributária, estimular investimentos, gerar empregos e devolver ao cidadão uma parcela maior do fruto do seu trabalho. O dinheiro pertence ao povo antes de pertencer ao Estado. Combater a inflação, equilibrar as contas públicas e reduzir tributos não são objetivos isolados. São partes de uma mesma estratégia para melhorar a vida das pessoas. Quando a inflação cai, o salário vale mais. Quando os juros caem de forma sustentável, as empresas investem mais. Quando os impostos diminuem, o trabalhador produz mais, empreende mais e prospera mais. O Brasil não precisa escolher entre responsabilidade fiscal e justiça social. Pelo contrário: a verdadeira justiça social começa com uma economia organizada, uma moeda estável, um Estado eficiente e um ambiente favorável ao trabalho, ao investimento e à livre iniciativa. É assim que se constrói um país de oportunidades, onde o sucesso de cada brasileiro depende cada vez mais de seu talento e esforço, e cada vez menos dos erros do governo. Nosso desafio não é administrar o declínio. Nosso desafio é restaurar a prosperidade. E isso exige liderança, responsabilidade e a coragem de fazer o que é certo, mesmo quando não é o mais fácil. Porque, no final das contas, um governo forte não é aquele que arrecada mais ou gasta mais. É aquele que cria as condições para que seu povo prospere, trabalhe, invista, sonhe e construa um futuro melhor para suas famílias. #Inflação #ResponsabilidadeFiscal #JustiçaSocial

Der UN-Bericht von Sonderberichterstatterin Irene Khan kritisiert Deutschland, weil das Verbot des Palästina-Demo-Slogans „from the river to the sea“ als unverhältnismäßig und völkerrechtswidrig betrachtet wird, was den Schutz der Meinungsfreiheit gefährde. #Meinungsfreiheit #UNBericht #Deutschland

Who wants to understand precisely why the RN, with its current program of refusing Frexit, will NOT CHANGE ONE IOTA the immigration policy of France must absolutely read this ⤵️ (Those who are satisfied with campaign slogans should not read it, but they should not come and...) (translated)