By Freddie Ponton | 21st Century Wire | February 10, 2026

In the last 48 hours, the U.S. Department of Justice has begun dumping what officials say amounts to more than three million pages of material tied to Jeffrey Epstein—an archive so vast it includes thousands of videos and hundreds of thousands of images. The tranche is only a fraction of what exists. Officials acknowledge that millions of additional documents remain under review, meaning the public has seen just a sliver of the government’s total Epstein archive. What is being unloaded into the public domain is not just evidence of private depravity; it is an inadvertent blueprint of how power really works when no one is supposed to be watching, an industrial‑scale influence machine whose files casually braid together billionaires, cabinet‑level officials, and strategic infrastructure from New York to the Horn of Africa. And even now, the public is being allowed to see only what officials deem manageable, with redactions still shielding some of the most sensitive names and millions of pages kept out of sight.

Hidden within those documents, leaks, screenshots, and email excerpts now circulating online, are connections that stretch far beyond Manhattan, Palm Beach, or even Paris. They reach deep into the Persian Gulf, into Dubai’s executive suites, and into the personal inboxes of officials in the United Arab Emirates.

These emails offer a unique glimpse behind the opulent shadows of Dubai’s towers, where untraceable billions flow like oil. In that world, a convicted pedophile whispers ministerial appointments to a UAE diplomat while discussing port deals that could move cargo and secrets across continents. According to persistent intelligence‑linked information surrounding his operations, Jeffrey Epstein was not acting alone or merely chasing thrills; he was allegedly operating as a geopolitical asset, cultivating leverage over Gulf elites, with places like Somaliland emerging as potential pawns in a larger strategic game. It is in such an environment that figures like Epstein thrive the best, because their private perversions double as statecraft.

Hind Al Owais and the Epstein Emails That Stain a Nation

Emails unearthed from the DOJ Epstein library reveal troubling facts about Jeffrey Epstein’s exchanges with Hind Al Owais, a young, ambitious Emirati woman navigating the opulent halls of UAE diplomacy. With her polished LinkedIn profile and lofty titles, she appears at first glance to be a symbol of progress. As director of the UAE’s Permanent Committee for Human Rights and a UN adviser since 2015, she has publicly championed women’s empowerment, declaring it both a moral and strategic imperative. On paper, Hind Al Owais is the face of a “modern” UAE: a diplomat, UN adviser, and later a senior human‑rights official fronting panels on women’s rights and regional mechanisms.

Hind Al Owais, UAE’s Permanent Committee for Human Rights and a UN adviser since 2015 (Source: YourStory.com)

In press releases, she speaks of “dignity” and “gender equality” while chairing events under the banner of the Permanent Committee for Human Rights in Abu Dhabi. In the emails, the tone is very different. The same woman who would later open high‑level human‑rights dialogues is trading easy banter with a convicted sex offender, eagerly accepting his career advice, and bringing family into his orbit. The contrast is not just personal hypocrisy; it looks like the textbook use of a polished, progressive female diplomat as a shield for an authoritarian system willing to outsource leverage work to a man like Epstein while selling the world a sanitised narrative at the UN.

The correspondence begins in 2011, during Epstein’s post‑prison resurgence. Al Owais, then a rising figure in UAE foreign affairs, began emailing the financier. Their communications suggest the exchanges were part of a broader effort to compromise UAE elites for Israeli leverage. Numerous emails linked to Hind Al Owais and Jeffrey Epstein from January 2012 are currently the subject of extensive scrutiny, prompting unsettling questions regarding the nature of their relationship. One email (EFTA01844869) states: “Getting one girl ready is difficult enough; two girls, you can certainly call a challenge.” Another conversation is said to mention introducing her sister to Epstein. In one message, Epstein positioned her as a future UAE Minister of Culture, declaring there would be “no competition.” (EFTA00909346)

One email (EFTA01845739) from January 26, 2012, stands out. Al Owais expresses excitement about introducing her sister, Hala, allegedly just 13 at the time, to Epstein, a man infamous for preying on underage girls. Epstein’s reply is suggestive, promising more time with both. Another message jokes about the challenge of preparing “two girls.” Critics online have seized on these exchanges, arguing that Al Owais was not just a passive contact but an active facilitator, a kind of soft‑power handler who normalised Epstein’s access to young Emirati women.

The DOJ emails that have surfaced so far do not explicitly spell out sexual transactions or list ages, which conveniently allows defenders to hide behind literalism. But in the real world, context matters: a senior diplomat, working in New York, repeatedly arranging access for “girls” to a man already notorious for abusing minors is not a neutral act; it is complicity dressed up as networking.

Online backlash was immediate. Critics claimed Al Owais worked as a procurer, supplying minors, including her own sister, to Epstein. Viral posts branded her a “pimp” and “Satan worshipper,” drawing thousands of retweets amid outrage over her UN role. Although no direct proof of underage involvement appears in the emails themselves, it can be argued that the pattern fits Epstein’s methods, which rest on compromising officials feeding a machine designed not only for pleasure but for leverage. Emails from 2017 show him lobbying against Qatar, accusing Doha of terrorism financing in line with UAE‑Israel strategies, underscoring that his communications with Gulf elites were deeply political, not merely social.

[…]

Adding another layer, discussions online claim Ghislaine Maxwell received girls supplied through the same network. Ex‑spy Ari Ben‑Menashe alleges the pair ran Mossad honeytraps together, building on older reports that Maxwell’s father, Robert Maxwell, had served as a Mossad asset. These accounts are contested and not fully documented, but the emerging patterns in the Epstein–UAE files sit uncomfortably close to what one would expect from an intelligence‑linked kompromat operation targeting Gulf elites.

[…]

Timeline of Epstein’s UAE–Israel Web

Year – Event

• 2009 – Bin Sulayem sends Epstein a torture video; Epstein replies, “I loved the torture video.”
• 2010 – Epstein allegedly linked in commentary to the Mossad hit on Hamas leader Mahmoud al‑Mabhouh in Dubai, fitting the broader narrative of an Israeli intelligence‑adjacent operator moving through Gulf territory.
• 2011–2012 – Al Owais emails Epstein about her sister and career boosts; Epstein dangles ministerial suggestions, positioning her as a future UAE Minister of Culture.
• 2013 – Epstein brokers Ehud Barak–bin Sulayem meetings for port investments, cementing a triangle linking an ex‑Israeli prime minister, a Dubai port magnate, and a convicted predator.
• 2017 – Epstein lobbies anti‑Qatar pressure in line with UAE and Israeli strategies, echoing the blockade politics that would reshape Gulf alliances.
• 2018 – Bin Sulayem shares Somaliland history; Epstein touts equity in the port and boasts of being basically in charge of nearby Djibouti facilities.
• 2020 – Abraham Accords normalize UAE–Israel ties, formalising a relationship that had already been woven in through years of quiet cooperation and shared interests.
• 2026 – Files and commentary claim Epstein trained under Barak for global blackmail operations, merging personal depravity with strategic utility.

The Somaliland Gambit — UAE Ports, Epstein’s Equity, and the Israeli Shadow

The bin Sulayem scandal converges in the dusty ports of Somaliland, a self‑declared republic clinging to independence from war‑torn Somalia.

[…]

Here, the UAE, through DP World and bin Sulayem, has poured billions into Berbera port, signing controversial agreements that bypass Somalia’s central government. DP World and its partners have committed up to 1 billion USD to logistics infrastructure along the Berbera corridor, tying the port into Ethiopian trade routes and Gulf markets, all under a legal framework that treats Somaliland as a quasi‑sovereign partner despite intermediary promoting Israeli technology, turning the territory into a bargaining chip in a three‑way game between Abu Dhabi, Tel Aviv, and Western security planners.

DP World handles roughly 80 million containers annually. To those who suspect trafficking behind the trade routes, that scale offers perfect cover. Israel was among the earliest nations to acknowledge the brief five‑day independence of British Somaliland in 1960, but it was on December 26, 2025, that Israel officially declared it would be the first nation to fully recognise Somaliland, sparking new developments in the Red Sea Basin. As part of this agreement, Israel plans to set up a diplomatic and potentially security presence in the region for the first time since its relations with Eritrea soured in 2020.

The human consequences are stark. Somali migrants fleeing famine risk falling into trafficking routes. Epstein’s proposed cultural projects in Somaliland echo the recruitment tactics used elsewhere in his network: philanthropy as bait, media as camouflage, and vulnerable populations as raw material.

Epstein, Mossad, and the Israeli Interest

For years, former intelligence officials, investigative journalists, and independent researchers have argued that Epstein was not simply a freelance blackmailer but an asset embedded in Israeli intelligence networks. Ari Ben‑Menashe, a self‑described former Israeli intelligence officer, has claimed that Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell ran a Mossad “honeytrap” operation, seeded by her father Robert Maxwell—himself long reported as a Mossad asset. These accounts are disputed and not yet backed by a full documentary record, but they sketch a plausible frame: private vice harnessed for state leverage, with Epstein as the smiling frontman.

What the DOJ files now reveal is a pattern that fits uncomfortably well with that hypothesis. You have an Israeli‑aligned fixer cultivating leverage over Gulf elites, moving seamlessly between private jets, UN corridors, and port concessions, just as Israel sought to break its regional isolation, secure new security corridors, and reposition itself along the Red Sea. Look at the map.

The same years in which Epstein is emailing bin Sulayem about “recognition of Somaliland” and boasting of influence around Djibouti are the years in which Israel is quietly repositioning itself on the Red Sea, negotiating normalisation with Gulf monarchies, and searching for ways to project power near Bab el‑Mandeb without provoking domestic backlash.

A privatised network of ports, logistics corridors, and pliable elites, facilitated by someone who holds their secrets, solves several problems at once. It offers deniable access, commercial cover, and a ready‑made human‑intelligence pipeline into regimes that officially still have to perform outrage for the Arab street. In that light, the Abraham Accords no longer look like a sudden breakthrough of “peace” but the public codification of relationships that had already been wired in through years of backchannel deals, port concessions, and blackmail‑ready kompromat.

Was Epstein’s network decisive in sealing those agreements? The evidence is not yet complete. But the architecture is visible: Emirati royals and executives enjoying the services of a man whose alleged handlers, according to multiple intelligence veterans, sat in Tel Aviv; strategic infrastructure in places like Berbera and Djibouti drifting quietly into Emirati hands; and, finally, a ribbon‑cutting ceremony in Washington where everyone pretends this was all about tourism and flights.

The Geopolitical Knot — Theories, Implications, and the Call for Justice

Viewed together, the Epstein–UAE saga becomes, in the eyes of its critics, more than a criminal case. It becomes a portrait of how global power allegedly weaponises personal vice. From Al Owais’s alleged facilitation to bin Sulayem’s torture‑video exchange and the port deals in Somaliland, the narrative paints Epstein as a fixer for Israeli strategic interests, operating in the gray zones where intelligence services, corporate empires, and royal courts overlap. His activities reportedly included brokering Qatari‑Israeli meetings and backchannels involving Russia and Syria, further blurring the line between private financier and unofficial envoy.

Some theories suggest the Abraham Accords were sealed with kompromat, transforming ports into surveillance nodes and trafficking corridors. Online outrage reflects broader anger at perceived hypocrisy. The victims, underage girls, abused labourers, displaced Somalis, remain central to the story, even as elites evade accountability and rebrand themselves as champions of reform.

[…]

Via https://21stcenturywire.com/2026/02/10/grooming-the-gulf-how-epstein-forged-emirati-elites-into-tools-for-israel/

Kristina Laila

Democrat Rep. Ro Khanna (CA) from the House floor read aloud the names of the six men who are likely incriminated in the Epstein files.

The Justice Department redacted the six names of men likely implicated in the Jeffrey Epstein files.

The DOJ recently gave Congress access to the unredacted Epstein files.

A week later, GOP Rep. Massie and Democrat Khanna said they may read the names of the six men on the House floor.

On Tuesday afternoon, Ro Khanna disclosed their names.

“Rep. Thomas Massie and I forced last night the DOJ to disclose the identities of 6 men,” Khanna said.

“Salvatore Nuara, Zurab Mikeladze, Leonic Leonov, Nicola Caputo, Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem, and Leslie Wexner,” he said.

Last year, President Trump signed the Epstein Files Transparency Act into law to release all files related to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation.

As The Gateway Pundit reported, the House overwhelmingly voted for the bill, with only one Republican defector, Rep. Clay Higgins (R-LA), voting against the bill, citing privacy concerns for victims of Epstein.

The Senate later approved the bill by unanimous consent.

Manhattan judge Richard Berman unsealed the documents after President Trump signed the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

The court documents are related to the 2019 grand jury indictment charging Jeffrey Epstein with sex trafficking offenses and the June 2020 grand jury indictment of Ghislaine Maxwell with numerous offenses related to the trafficking and coercion of minors.

“Since July 6, 2025, there has been extensive public interest in the basis for the Memorandum’s conclusions. While the Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation continue to adhere to the conclusions reached in the Memorandum, transparency to the American public is of the utmost importance to this Administration,” they wrote in a court filing reviewed by The Gateway Pundit.

[…]

Via https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2026/02/democrat-rep-ro-khanna-reads-aloud-names-six/

Zero Hedge

Although President Donald J. Trump has amplified his attacks against Kentucky representative Thomas Massie on the basis of deluded claims that he is a radical, un-American liberal who is hellbent on sabotaging his administration, it is the congressman’s continued crusade to expose the crimes of Jeffrey Epstein that shows the actual threat he poses to Trump.

The latest development in the Epstein Files fallout has clearly proven that the Trump administration’s best attempts to continue to cover up the crimes of Epstein and his accomplices are no match for Massie’s vigilance. After granting members of Congress access to view unredacted versions of the Epstein Files in response to the pressure mounted by Massie, the revelations therein have shown the lengths that the Trump Department of Justice (”DOJ”) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (”FBI”) have taken to continue the Epstein cover-up, going as far as to break federal law in an increasingly futile attempt to keep the truth from the American public.

The enhanced political pressure from Massie and California representative Ro Khanna following their success in passing The Epstein Files Transparency Act resulted in the Trump DOJ deciding to allow members of Congress to view unredacted files beginning on Monday morning. Members of Congress have been given limited access to view unredacted versions of the Epstein Files on computers at DOJ offices, provided they give 24 hours’ notice, though they will not be given access to the physical documents themselves.

The DOJ has limited access to members of Congress alone, excluding any members of their staff. Although members of Congress will be able to take notes on any files they view, the DOJ has prohibited them from bringing any electronic devices into their review sessions. Unredacted documents made accessible to members of Congress are also limited to the trove of over 3 million files that have been released to the public, far short of the full scope of the more than 6 million files the DOJ has said it has in its possession.

Despite being given such limited access, the revelations included in what has been made available have led to a monumental shift that disproves the Trump administration’s narrative that the action it has been taken on the Epstein Files has been made with the aim of providing full transparency. According to representatives Massie and Khanna, they have identified at least six individuals incriminated in Epstein’s crimes, two of whom the FBI has officially labeled as co-conspirators, in the limited time allocated to them on the first day of being able to review the unredacted files whose identities have been obfuscated by the Trump administration despite their apparent complicity. Of those officially acknowledged as a co-conspirator is high-profile Epstein associate and billionaire Les Wexner, whose confirmation as such opens the door to criminal charges being brough against against high-ranking members of the Trump administration.

While Wexner’s role in facilitating the crimes of Epstein has been well-established for years, the revelation that the FBI officially acknowledged him as a co-conspirator by 2019 dismantles the narrative woven by the Trump administration that it has not withheld the identities of any of the notorious pedophile’s accomplices. In September 2025, Patel ostensibly did just that when he testified before Congress regarding Epstein.

During his testimony, Patel was asked “Who did Epstein traffic these young women to?” by Louisiana Senator John N. Kennedy. Patel responded, “Himself.” There is no credible information—none—that he trafficked to other individuals.” The revelation that the FBI had confirmed that Wexner was a co-conspirator of Epstein by 2019 suggests that Patel lied to Congress during his testimony. Under 18 U.S.C. § 1001, knowingly and willingly making a materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement to Congress is a felony punishable by a prison sentence of up to five years.

In response to Massie exposing the FBI’s documented admission of Wexner as a co-conspirator years before Patel testified to Congress that the agency he helms had no credible information of others involved in Epstein’s criminal network, the DOJ went on the defensive in a feeble attempt to minimize the seriousness of this revelation. US Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche offered an explanation to Massie for the sweeping redactions made by the DOJ in violation of The Epstein Files Transparency Act. Blanche stated that one particular document highlighted by Massie, which had 18 of the 20 names included in it redacted, was so heavily censored because it included “numerous victim names.”

However, the newly released version of the document without the prohibited redactions withheld only 2 of the 20 names, meaning that the DOJ illegally redacted 16 before being forced to publish its revised version.

Despite the brief time Massie was given to review unredacted versions of the Epstein Files released to the public, he was able to uncover the name of another potential co-conspirator implicated in one of the most disturbing documents to be released to the public. In the Epstein Files release EFTA00774231, a redacted sender emailed Epstein on April 24th, 2009, writing, “where are you? are you ok , I loved the torture video.”

Outrage over the gruesome content of the email alluding to a snuff film justifying the claims that the crimes of the Epstein network went far beyond human trafficking and child sexual abuse resounded throughout the public discourse after its revelation. That anger was amplified by the DOJ’s decision to redact the identity of the email’s author, as there was no indication it was the name of one of Epstein’s victims, whom the DOJ would be allowed to conceal in compliance with The Epstein Files Transparency Act. After viewing the unredacted version of the email, Massie announced that the disclosure revealed that Emirati business magnate Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem was the person who sent the email discussing the torture video to Epstein.

Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem, an Emirati businessman who is the chairman and chief executive officer of DP World and the chairman of the Ports, Customs & Free Zone Corporation, is referenced in 336 of the more than 3 million Epstein files currently available to the public. The files concerning Bin Sulayem reveal a years-long relationship between the two. In the Epstein Files release EFTA01155800, Epstein states that his relationship with Bin Sulayem began in 2002 in a letter of recommendation written regarding a property the Emirati businessman sought to lease in New York City.

Numerous other emails between Epstein and Bin Sulayem contain images withheld by the DOJ, exchanges regarding each party’s travel plans, dinner invitations, and numerous correspondences including Boris Nikolic, the biotech venture capitalist and Bill Gates adviser who was named as an executor of Epstein’s estate in his last will and testament amended just before his supposed death on August 10th, 2019. The earliest evidence of Epstein introducing Nikolic to Bin Sulayem is documented in Epstein Files release EFTA00897104, an email sent by Epstein to Bin Sulayem on October 11th, 2010. Epstein copies Nikolic on the email, the body of which reads “Boris, Nov 29 30.” An email written to Epstein at 6:50:20 pm on November 29th, 2010, by Nikolic, disclosed as Epstein Files release EFTA02415345, confirms that he and Bin Sulayem met on the date referenced in the October 2010 email.

Files documenting the notorious pedophile’s close relationship with Bin Sulayem also reveal communication with other members of Epstein’s innermost circle throughout their near decades-long relationship. In a June 27th, 2011 email exchange with a respondent named “Sarah K.,” presumably Sarah Kellen—who was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in Epstein’s 2008 non-prosecution agreement tendered by the former Trump Secretary of Labor Alexander Acosta during his tenure as the US Attorney for the Southern District of Florida under the Bush administration—Bin Sulayem coordinates the receipt of a package sent to him from Epstein. Bin Sulayem also held similar discussions when coordinating visits with and receiving shipments from Epstein with another unindicted co-conspirator named in the non-prosecution agreement, Lesley Groff.

Bin Sulayem’s ingratiation into Epstein’s network also confirms that Epstein introduced him to former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. This is confirmed in the Epstein Files release EFTA02600899, in which Bin Sulayem invites Barak to visit him for dinner to discuss business opportunities during his stay in Tel Aviv at a penthouse located at 1 Rothschild Boulevard.

In iMessages with Epstein on August 15th, 2015, Bin Sulayem coordinates a visit during a trip to New Mexico, where Epstein’s infamous Zorro Ranch, the site where he was alleged to have run a black market baby farm, was located. The Emirati business magnate admits he was traveling with his wife, three children, and their nanny when coordinating his visit with Epstein before sending him links to various pornographic websites. Epstein’s responses are sparse, solely confirming that he has sent a car to transport Bin Sulayem to meet with him. Bin Sulayem also refers to an email he sent Epstein from a private email address, which is redacted by the DOJ.

As in the case of other file redactions, US Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche responded to Massie’s revelation that Sultan Ahmed Bin Sulayem was the sender of the torture video email to Epstein by defending the DOJ’s decision to redact it. Blanche stated the redaction complied with The Epstein Files Transparency Act, as it was made due to the message only including Bin Sulayem’s email address, and as personally identifiable information, that information was required to be withheld. However, that explanation proved to be a Pyrrhic victory against Massie, as it also served as a tacit admission that Bin Sulayem was indeed the author of the email discussing the torture video with Epstein.

Reactions from other members of Congress who were able to review unredacted versions of the Epstein Files on Monday signify the seismic shift taking place against the Trump administration. Colorado Republican congressional representative Lauren Boebert spoke with a reporter when leaving the DOJ offices after viewing the unredacted Epstein files.

Boebert, who has been a strong ally of Trump’s during her tenure in Congress, appeared visibly angry during the interview. She expressed her belief that the Trump DOJ has knowingly redacted the names of accomplices of Epstein in violation of The Epstein Files Transparency Act.

“I think that there are folks who are definitely implicated and co-conspirators, and, you know, I don’t think everyone there that was talking about underage girls being trafficked are victims.”

When asked a follow-up question regarding the potential of clemency for convicted Epstein co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell, Boebert’s frustration showed as she vociferously rejected the premise, stating, “I think Ghislaine Maxwell should get more time, and she should definitely be in a harsher prison.” It’s absolutely disgusting.”

In November, President Trump attempted to persuade Representative Boebert to remove her name from the discharge petition that ultimately led to the passage of The Epstein Files Transparency Act. Trump similarly took that tactic against other key allies of his in Congress, including Representative Nancy Mace of South Carolina and then-Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia. That futile effort to continue to insulate the co-conspirators of Jeffrey Epstein resulted in an irreconcilable schism with Greene, which led to her resignation from Congress. Following the announcement of her resignation, Greene revealed that Trump attempted to persuade her to vote against releasing the Epstein Files because their disclosure would harm friends of the president who would be implicated in them.

The continued effort to protect the co-conspirators of Jeffrey Epstein has only further undermined President Trump’s legitimacy, as revelations of the extent of the cover-up he continues to perpetrate not only risks alienating crucial political allies but also, in doing so, furthers political momentum gaining traction against the president that could lead to action taken against key administration officials such as the impeachment of Attorney General Pam Bondi and potential criminal charges being brought against FBI Director Kash Patel. With its political foundation being shaken to its core in the fallout from how it has handled the release of the Epstein Files, it appears that it is only a matter of time before the house of cards that the Trump administration has turned itself into because of its unyielding commitment to protecting the pedophile elite comes crashing down.

[…]

Via https://www.zerohedge.com/political/massie-exposes-les-wexner-epstein-co-conspirator-opening-door-criminal-charges-against

Caitlin Johnstone

Australian authorities were fully aware that inviting Israel’s president for a visit was going to ignite unrest and furious opposition. They invited him anyway, and sent in the police to assault the protesters.

I saw a video of two cops pinning a kid in a keffiyeh face down on the ground and proceeding to punch him over and over again long after he’d been subdued.

I saw another video of police repeatedly punching a middle-aged man who was holding his hands in the air until he fell to the ground.

I saw another video of police repeatedly pepper spraying a demonstrator directly in the face as he was visibly complying with their demands to move and providing no resistance whatsoever.

I saw another video of police manhandling Muslim men who were literally on their knees praying, presenting no possible threat of any kind.

That’s right kids, welcome to Australia, where the government invites the head of a genocidal apartheid state for a happy cuddle party and then beats the shit out of anyone who opposes this.

It’s a testament to the courage and vitality of the pro-Palestine movement in Australia that people keep showing up to anti-genocide protests even as authorities do everything they can to create a chilling effect on them.

After all, this happens as the state of Queensland moves to make it illegal to utter the pro-Palestine phrases “from the river to the sea” or “globalise the intifada”, with violations punishable by two years in prison. This is easily the single most bat shit insane speech suppression legislation in Australian history, and that’s an extremely high bar.

To be clear, not one person sincerely believes that “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” is a genocidal or antisemitic statement. This is one of those many, many instances in which Israel supporters are pretending to believe something they do not actually believe in order to further outlaw criticism of Israel.

They’re trying to make it so that nobody feels comfortable opposing Israel’s abuses without first consulting with a lawyer about what exactly they are legally permitted to say in that moment, thereby throwing a chilling effect on pro-Palestine activism throughout the nation.

This comes weeks after the Australian government passed frightening new “hate speech” laws in the name of “combatting antisemitism” which will make it much easier to designate activist groups as “hate groups”. Australian officials have conspicuously refused to say that the new laws will not be used to ban groups for speech that is critical of Israel, which tells you all you need to know about the real intentions at work here.

This also comes as the state of New South Wales cracks down on protests with extreme aggression, banning protests in certain areas and seeking to outlaw the use of the phrase “globalise the intifada” to appease Australia’s obscenely powerful Israel lobby. Premier Chris Minns is presently defending the actions of the police he sent in to crack skulls at the Herzog protests on Monday.

Just two months ago a prominent member of the Australian Israel lobby publicly announced that he wants a total ban on pro-Palestine protests throughout the nation, and said it is criticism of Israel that is the problem, not just hatred toward Jews. Joel Burnie, Executive Manager of the Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council (AIJAC), explicitly said that what he wants is “No more protests! No more protests!” in Australia.

“I for one as a Jewish leader will no long talk about antisemitism in isolation from Israel, because it’s the rhetoric and language on Israel that motivates the people to come and kill us,” Burnie said during a video conference, later adding that “ language on Israel invading all of our social spaces in Australia have made this country a very unsafe space and place for Jews.”

Increment by increment, Joel Burnie and his ilk have been getting their wish ever since. Australian civil rights are indeed being disintegrated to protect the information interests of a genocidal apartheid state.

As I often remind readers, Australia is the only so-called democracy in the world which has no national charter or bill of rights of any kind. A tremendous amount of faith has been placed in state and federal legislators to simply do the right thing, which has proved foolish and ineffective. Professor George Williams wrote for the Melbourne University Law Review in 2006:

“Australia is now the only democratic nation in the world without a national bill of rights. Some comprehensive form of legal protection for basic rights is otherwise seen as an essential check and balance in democratic governance around the world. Indeed, I can find no example of a democratic nation that has gained a new Constitution or legal system in recent decades that has not included some form of a bill of rights, nor am I aware of any such nation that has done away with a bill of rights once it has been put in place.”

This system plainly does not work. Australians desperately need speech protections enshrined in our Constitution, because we cannot trust our leaders to resist efforts to silence us whenever our speech becomes inconvenient to powerful people and influential lobbying groups.

[…]

Via https://caitlinjohnstone.com.au/2026/02/10/in-australia-the-police-beat-you-up-for-opposing-genocide/

A simple labeled model showing aluminum bridged to two fluoride ions and the glyphosate structure, illustrating the phosphate-like geometry.

Michelle Perro, MD

Jan 27, 2026

It turns out they form a partnership that neither regulators nor the public fully understand. Once they come into contact with a common third player, aluminum, the trio can create a complex molecule that alters how the body performs some of its most fundamental biochemical tasks.

1. Two Everyday Chemicals With Hidden Interactions

• Fluoride is a highly reactive halogen. The form added to drinking water (as hydrofluorosilicic acid or sodium fluoride) is industrially derived rather than mined from natural mineral sources.
• Glyphosate is a synthetic amino acid derivative designed to kill plants by disrupting a pathway that humans supposedly “do not have.” But our gut microbes do depend on that pathway, and so do our mitochondria through similar enzymes.

Each chemical on its own is already contentious. But when fluoride and glyphosate interact with aluminum, something new emerges: a ternary complex that behaves like a phosphate imposter in the body.

2. The Chemistry Simplified

In the presence of aluminum (Al³⁺), fluoride (F⁻) and glyphosate bind tightly to form a stable molecular structure known as an Al–F–Glyphosate complex. This can occur in acidic soils, water pipes, or inside living tissue.

Biochemically, this complex mimics phosphate, a fundamental molecule used in energy transfer (ATP), DNA, and numerous cellular signaling processes. The body cannot easily distinguish between true phosphate and this imitation.

When that happens, enzymes responsible for energy metabolism, hormone regulation, and neuronal activity can become confused. They may remain permanently switched “on” or “off,” misfiring the delicate systems that keep metabolism and brain function stable.

3. Why This Matters Biologically

When these complexes form, they are small enough and neutrally charged enough to cross protective membranes including the blood–brain barrier. Their phosphate-like geometry allows them to enter brain tissue, thyroid cells, and kidneys through natural phosphate transport channels.

The result can include:

• Energy metabolism fatigue through disruption of ATP synthesis
• Neurological stress from interference with nerve signaling enzymes
• Thyroid suppression, because fluoride and glyphosate both block iodine uptake
• Reduced detoxification capacity as the kidneys struggle to excrete the complex

In laboratory systems, aluminum–fluoride molecules are already known to mimic phosphate so precisely that scientists use them experimentally to “freeze” enzymes in active states. Imagine that happening not just in a Petri dish, but inside living human cells.

4. The Environmental Equation

This chemical combination is not exotic. It appears wherever three modern conditions overlap:

1. Widespread glyphosate application on crops and lawns
2. Municipal water fluoridation
3. The presence of aluminum, from cookware, processed food additives, geoengineering, or the soil itself in acidic regions

These elements coexist in most industrialized settings.

Across the United States, approximately 73 to 74 percent of residents served by community water systems (over 200 million people) drink fluoridated water each day.

Regional contrast is striking: https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/articles/2024-12-06/map-fluoride-in-drinking-water-by-state:

• Kentucky, West Virginia, Illinois, and Georgia maintain fluoridation rates above 95 percent.
• Hawaii, Oregon, Utah, and much of Florida remain largely unfluoridated.
• In May 2025, the State of Florida formally banned community-water fluoridation, joining Utah in rejecting the practice after state‑level health reviews cited safety uncertainties and escalating infrastructure costs.

5. The Human Cost of Chemical Complacency

Our regulatory framework still evaluates each compound in isolation. Pesticide agencies examine glyphosate. Dental-health agencies examine fluoride. Environmental departments handle aluminum. No one studies what happens when all three combine in the bloodstream of a child.

This siloed approach blinds policymakers to chemical synergy which is the way molecules can amplify each other’s effects even at very low levels. The emerging evidence on Al–F–Glyphosate complexes suggests that chronic low-dose exposure may produce subtle, but widespread biological stress, especially in infants, developing children, and those with impaired renal filtration.

6. Reducing Exposure Naturally

While we wait for regulators to catch up with reality, individuals can take protective steps to safeguard their families:

1. Filter your water thoroughly. Reverse osmosis or activated‑alumina systems remove fluoride and aluminum together.
2. Choose food consciously. Glyphosate residues cluster in non‑organic grains, legumes, and oats; select certified organic regenerative food when possible.
3. Rebuild mineral balance. Adequate calcium and magnesium help keep fluoride from binding to aluminum or displacing essential ions.
4. Strengthen antioxidant defenses. Nutrients such as vitamin C, selenium, and plant compounds like turmeric and moringa counter oxidative stress.

7. A Broader Perspective

The story of fluoride and glyphosate is about more than chemistry. It reflects a mindset that treats human biology as a controlled experiment and assumes small exposures are harmless. But the data suggest that “safe in isolation” does not equal “safe in combination.”

Public health advances will depend on reframing how we assess environmental mixtures. A truly protective policy must look at interactions, not averages.

[…]

Via https://michelleperromd337477.substack.com/p/the-hidden-chemical-partnership-how

Al-Kindi

Episode 7 – The House of Wisdom

Islamic Golden Age (2017)

By Eamon Gearon

Film Review

Hunhan ibn Izhaq (809-873 AD), an Arab Nestorian Christian, was the Baghdad House of Wisdom’s most prolific translator of Greek as well as personal physician to caliph al Ma’mun. In the latter role, he was imprisoned for a year for refusing to prepare a poison to kill one of Ma’mun’s enemies.

Following his release, al-Ma’mun appointed him as the House of Wisdom’s head of translation. It’s thanks to him that Europe gained access to Galen (a Greek physician 129-216 AD), Euclid, Hippocrates, Plato  and other Greek philosophers and scientists whose work inspired the European renaissance. Ibn Izhak also translated (into Arabic) the entire Greek version of the Old Testament.

As a representative of the world’s largest and wealthiest empire in history (to that date), Ibn Izhak paid House of Wisdom translators the book’s weight in gold for each text they translated. It’s also under his guidance, al-Ma’mun contacted the Persian emir and the Byzantine emperor, requesting a copy of every book in their libraries. Amazingly they complied.

Muslim Arab philosopher, mathematician and physician al-Kindi was the House of Wisdom’s most senior scholar and sometimes translator during the ninth century. One of his projects was to apply Aristotle’s and Plato’s emphasis on logic and reasoning. to support the concept of monotheism. Neither Al Ma-Mun nor al-Kindi aw any conflict between the Islamic faith and logic, though this view would change with the advent of Islamic fundamentalism.

Both ibn Izhak and al-Kindi set a new standard for translation that, instead of translating word for word, emphasized the overall context of the translated text. The two scholars checked and corrected each other’s translations.

The author of 230 original works, al-Kindi was the first philosopher in history to do a detailed outline of all the branches of science

His Decrypting Encrypted Correspondence was the most comprehensive and advanced treatise on code breaking until World War II. He primarily used frequency analysis of letters and combinations of letters to decipher codes.

https://www.kanopy.com/en/pukeariki/watch/video/5756987/5756999