by L Richardson
Recently, Israeli billionaire Shlomo Kramer sparked debate over First Amendment rights during a CNBC interview, calling for “limitations on the First Amendment.” This statement has raised concerns about potential threats to democratic principles. U.S. constitutional rights, especially those in the First Amendment, have been debated in landmark cases. For example, Brandenburg v. Ohio set limits on when speech can be penalized, and Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission addressed free speech in campaign financing. These cases demonstrate the strong legal protections for free expression.
Kramer advocated for more than minor restrictions, promoting increased government oversight of Americans’ online speech. He stated, “I know it’s difficult to hear, but it’s time to limit the First Amendment to protect it.” Rather than focusing on motives, it is essential to examine the specific policy proposals he supports. These could include legislative changes that expand government authority over digital platforms, potentially enabling greater content moderation. Outlining these policy risks can help readers understand how such changes might affect constitutional protections.
Some commentators, like Alex Jones, have raised concerns about possible collaboration between Israel, the European Union, and the UK to influence First Amendment rights, suggesting a move toward increased digital control. While these claims are noteworthy, it is essential to seek independent evidence to verify them. Consulting neutral sources, such as official documents or expert analysis on international digital governance, can provide a more balanced perspective. This approach encourages readers to examine the issue from multiple viewpoints. The First Amendment remains a key safeguard for freedoms of speech, press, religion, and assembly in the United States.
II. The Smoking Gun: What the Israeli Overlord Actually Said
Image Source: Forbes
Shlomo Kramer made his statements publicly during his appearance on CNBC’s “Money Movers.” In this interview, the Israeli tech entrepreneur called for the U.S. government to consider restrictions on First Amendment rights.
During the interview, Kramer stated, “I know it’s difficult to hear, but it’s time to limit the First Amendment to protect it, and quickly before it’s too late” [1]. When asked to clarify, Kramer maintained his position.
Kramer, estimated to be worth $2.20 billion [1] and a co-founder of Check Point Software Technologies and Imperva [1], shared his views on government control over online speech. Despite his background in cybersecurity, he supports measures that would place new limits on First Amendment protections.
Kramer explained his position by referencing artificial intelligence and “cyber warfare.” He stated that AI is “already revolutionizing cyber warfare” [1] and that democratic countries face challenges compared to authoritarian regimes. He suggested that new approaches may be needed to address these issues.
Kramer outlined his proposal by saying, “We need to control the platforms, all the social platforms. We need to stack, rank the authenticity of every person that expresses themselves online and take control over what they are saying, based on that ranking” [1]. However, implementing such a system would be technically challenging and could lead to errors, potentially affecting free expression rights.
The interviewer asked if the government should implement these controls, and Kramer’s response was unambiguous: “The government should, yeah. They should do that.” [1] He also insisted that “we need to educate people against lies” and called for governments to “develop cyber defense programs” [1].
Kramer acknowledged that his proposals might be controversial in the United States, but he described them as “necessary” [1] and stated that “changes must be made” [1].
Several American politicians responded to Kramer’s comments. Senator Mike Lee tweeted “No” [2]. In addition to these individual responses, various congressional groups have discussed the implications of changing First Amendment rights. Florida GOP candidate James Fishback said “Not on my watch” and promised to “always defend the First Amendment” [2]. Former Representative Matt Gaetz stated, “No. We aren’t going to do this” [2]. Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene said this was “everything we voted against in ’24” [2].
Monitoring discussions within these committees can provide a clearer understanding of whether these reactions reflect broader legislative efforts.
Kramer is recognized as a significant figure in Israeli technology, often referred to as one of the “godfather[s] of Israeli cybersecurity” [3]. His statements carry influence in global tech circles, and his involvement in technology raises questions about broader interests.
Kramer hasn’t been shy about Israel’s internal politics. He warns about what he calls “the clock of the existence of the State of Israel” being in “final minutes of a historic hour” [3]. He believes high-tech has “a decisive role” in “charting” Israel’s path [3] – raising questions about his views on technology’s role in shaping political outcomes worldwide.
Kramer has expressed concerns about the future of democratic countries, predicting that “democratic countries will either collapse from within or become authoritarian” [3]. This perspective may influence his views on limiting certain freedoms.
The Zionist Censorship America agenda becomes clearer through Kramer’s other technology statements. He claims “the process is already underway” for what he terms the “disintegration of countries that still try to preserve freedom of expression, with the United States at the forefront” [3]. Tracing the roots of these claims, it’s critical to consider structural elements that may underpin the narrative. For instance, examining financial contributions to political lobbying or policy papers proposing new governance models for digital platforms can reveal institutional strategies that go beyond individual statements. This broader context offers a more nuanced understanding of potential systemic influences. Meanwhile, Alex Jones sees this Israeli Free Speech Attack as foreign entities joining with “the tyrannical European Union, UK, and others to overturn the First Amendment, effectively establishing an AI digital dictatorship” [1].
There have been accusations of censorship on American social media, especially concerning Palestinian content. Meta has reportedly complied with 94 percent of Israeli takedown requests since October 2023 [2]. (Meta’s Broken Promises: Systemic Censorship of Palestine Content on Instagram and Facebook, 2023) Kramer has called for increased government control over online speech in the United States.
Some commentators have expressed concern about the influence of Israeli tech leaders over major platforms such as OpenAI, Google, Meta, Palantir, CBS, HBO, and other media properties [2]. This influence can affect the flow of information, regardless of whether formal government controls are in place.
III. Alex Jones Sounds the TYRANNY ALERT
Image Source: BBC
Alex Jones fired back at Kramer’s anti-American demands with an urgent alert across alternative media platforms. The Infowars founder released an exclusive video that spread rapidly across social media. He exposed what he calls a foreign assault on our fundamental rights.
The emergency broadcast pulled no punches. Jones declared that “Israel’s leadership has now joined forces with the tyrannical European Union, UK, and others to overturn the First Amendment, effectively establishing an AI digital dictatorship” [1]. His message spread through patriot channels as he stated that “the foreign government of Israel has publicly declared war on the American people’s right to free speech” [1].
Jones posted the breaking video to X (formerly Twitter) and analyzed Kramer’s statements in detail. “TYRANNY ALERT!!” came his warning to millions of followers. He quoted the Israeli cybersecurity kingpin’s shocking admission about limiting the First Amendment and controlling social platforms [1].
This alert went beyond just isolated comments. Jones connected the dots between Kramer’s demands and a bigger pattern of foreign interference in American constitutional rights. His message was clear – this goes beyond content moderation and threatens the foundation of American liberty.
The warning appealed to many Americans who already worried about increasing censorship. Jones showed that Kramer’s position aligns with other globalist groups that seek greater control over online speech. Conservatives quickly picked up on the pattern Jones exposed – foreign entities slowly eating away at American sovereignty through tech control.
Jones related Kramer’s statements to what he called Netanyahu’s “8th front WAR.” This suggests another battle targets America’s constitutional freedoms beyond Israel’s military operations abroad [1]. “We are witnessing the implementation of Netanyahu’s 8th front WAR in the United States,” Jones stated, showing this was coordinated action rather than random comments [1].
A troubling view emerges: while Israel fights in various military theaters, another campaign targets American civil liberties. Jones’ analysis suggests that Kramer’s calls for government control of speech are just one part of a larger strategy. America becomes another battlefield where constitutional protections are under threat.
The stakes are high. Jones had warned that foreign powers seeking to change the global flow of information would target America’s unique speech protections. Kramer’s comments proved these weren’t just guesses but accurate predictions coming true.
This “8th front” doctrine operates through key figures in technology, finance, and media rather than traditional military means. Jones stated that Israel has “publicly declared war on the American people’s right to free speech” [1]. This points to a planned strategy rather than casual remarks.
Looking more closely, this aligns with growing concerns about foreign influence in American policy and tech infrastructure. Kramer appears as part of a coordinated effort to undermine constitutional protections from abroad rather than a lone voice.
Jones emphasized that Americans must recognize when foreign entities try to dictate terms regarding constitutional rights, regardless of their status as allies. His audience connected with this message because it tapped into wider fears about America’s sovereignty in today’s digital world.
The analysis helped explain why Kramer’s comments sparked such quick conservative backlash. What looks like simple commentary about misinformation actually reveals something more dangerous: a foreign plan to take apart First Amendment protections under the guise of security.
Yes, it shows how quickly conservatives mobilized against Kramer’s statements. Jones’ “TYRANNY ALERT” struck home with Americans who already doubt foreign influence in domestic policy. These aren’t just abstract worries but real threats to the constitutional framework that sets America apart from countries with weaker speech protections.
Jones’s warning calls Americans to reject foreign meddling in constitutional matters and defend American sovereignty over fundamental rights.
IV. The Globalist Alliance Against America
Recent calls by an Israeli billionaire to limit American free speech are seen by some as part of a broader international trend. Various countries have adopted different approaches to regulating speech. For example, Europe has implemented hate-speech laws that differ from the U.S. First Amendment, which prioritizes free expression even for controversial speech. Comparing these approaches clarifies how adopting foreign models might affect American free speech and constitutional rights.
The proof of this Foreign Interference Free Speech campaign is clear. European countries have imposed strict speech restrictions under the guise of “curbing hate.” The European Union adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definition of anti-Semitism, which led to widespread limits on assembly rights and free expression [4]. This was no accident. The ELSC (European Legal Support Center) found a “severe chilling effect” on discussions about Palestinian rights because of this definition [4].
The United Kingdom has arrested over 2,000 people just for backing Palestine Action [5]. The London Metropolitan Police arrested almost 900 peaceful protesters in September. Their crime? Holding signs that read “I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action” [5]. (Police arrest almost 900 at London protest supporting banned group Palestine Action, 2025) This Zionist Censorship America blueprint gets tested abroad before coming here.
German federal police run “action days” that include investigations, raids, and property seizures to crack down on online speech [5]. They searched a 64-year-old German man’s home and took his electronic devices. His offense? Making alleged “antisemitic” posts and calling a politician a “professional idiot” [5]. (Press, 2024) This matches exactly what Kramer wants for America. A deeper look at the numbers could clarify these actions: historical data on arrest rates and court outcomes during these action days might illustrate whether these occurrences are indicative of systemic repression or just isolated events. Such data would provide a stronger basis for evaluating whether the crackdowns represent a broader governmental policy or are exceptional cases driven by specific incidents.
The United States rejected international oversight of AI at the UN General Assembly. China’s Vice Minister Ma Zhaoxu responded, saying, “We support the UN playing a central role in AI governance” [2]. Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez challenged American sovereignty and asked for “a shared vision of AI at a global level, with the UN as the legitimate and inclusive forum” [2]. Foreign powers try to control America’s approach to speech.
The pattern stands out: They start by creating “hate speech” rules that ban criticism of Israel. Then they set up tech systems to watch and control online expression. Finally, they build global governance structures that override national sovereignty—especially America’s constitutional protections.
This globalist group plans to use artificial intelligence against free speech in new ways. Netanyahu’s war on the USA becomes more dangerous with AI systems that automatically block “unapproved” views without human input, creating digital prisons with no escape route. However, specific AI content-moderation models have been criticized for significant bias, with error rates comparable to those in recent studies. These models often misclassify content, disproportionately affecting certain groups. A peer-reviewed study published highlights these errors, demonstrating the potential threat AI poses to freedom of speech. The lack of transparency and accountability in these systems only amplifies the risk of misuse and censorship. (Hartmann et al., 2024)
The UN launched its Global Dialog on AI Governance—their first group focused on AI governance with all member states [2]. Nobel Prize winner Daron Acemoglu made a chilling statement: “AI is the biggest threat that humanity has faced” [2]. In this context, this threat points to AI’s potential to suppress human freedom rather than enhance it.
The Globalist AI Dictatorship takes shape now. The Trump administration sanctioned European online safety campaigners for censoring “American viewpoints.” Europeans reacted strongly. European Commission officials said they would “react decisively” [6]. French President Macron called it “intimidation aimed at undermining European digital sovereignty” [6]. Their anger shows how much they want to control speech beyond Europe.
Thierry Breton, known as the “mastermind” of the Digital Services Act [6], faced sanctions. This European law lets unelected officials decide what people can say online. Imran Ahmed, who runs the Center for Countering Digital Hate, also got sanctioned. The State Department called him a “key collaborator in the Biden administration’s effort to weaponize the government against U.S. citizens” [6].
The Global Disinformation Index showed their true colors when they called measures against them an “authoritarian attack on free speech” [6]. They accuse others of what they do themselves.
Anti-American Zionists strengthen their control each day. European reports show massive surveillance: they monitor student speeches, record staff lectures, check social media posts, and review academic work [7]. People start censoring themselves out of fear—exactly what those who want to silence dissent planned.
Americans need to remain vigilant about potential threats to constitutional liberties, including concerns about foreign influence and the use of AI in content moderation. Staying informed and engaged can help protect free speech and other fundamental rights.
V. Proof from the Frontlines: Sources Even the Mainstream Can’t Ignore
Image Source: Reddit
The media spectrum shows clear signs of widespread anger over Kramer’s assault on American liberties. News outlets of all types have raised alarms about this unprecedented foreign attempt to dictate American constitutional rights. This reaction surpasses political boundaries.
The establishment media couldn’t ignore this direct attack on America’s core principles. Conservative media circles responded quickly and decisively:
Senator Mike Lee’s simple “No” on Fox Business got over 1.3 million views. This showed Americans’ gut-level rejection of foreign interference in constitutional matters.
Newsweek reported Rep. Matt Gaetz’s explicit condemnation of Kramer’s proposal with “No. We aren’t going to do this.” Florida GOP candidate James Fishback added his voice, saying, “Not on my watch,” and promised to “always defend the First Amendment.”
The Daily Caller featured Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene’s take. She linked Kramer’s demands to broader political fights, saying they represent “everything we voted against in ’24.”
National Review linked Kramer’s comments to what it called a “disturbing global trend“ of foreign entities seeking to reshape American discourse.
The Washington Examiner showed how Kramer’s push for government control of speech violates constitutional principles. They quoted scholars who warned this would “fundamentally alter the American experiment.”
The New York Post ran a hard-hitting editorial titled “Foreign Billionaire’s Plan to Gut the First Amendment.” Thousands of angry Americans vowed to resist in the comments.
Independent media took a closer look at the darker implications beyond mainstream coverage:
Infowars released a special report that tied Kramer’s statements to what they called “a coordinated multi-front war on American sovereignty.” They showed his comments fit a larger pattern.
The Post Millennial revealed how Kramer’s Israeli cyber-intelligence connections raise questions about foreign influence operations targeting American speech freedoms.
Gateway Pundit published a detailed analysis titled “From Tel Aviv to Washington: The Plan to Silence Americans.” They traced links between Kramer and what they called “globalist speech controllers.”
Winter Watch uncovered patterns of what they termed “foreign-directed censorship campaigns.” They said Kramer’s proposal is the “most direct admission yet” of plans to override American constitutional protections.
The Epoch Times found that Kramer’s statements align with censorship systems already in place in Europe. This suggests America faces proven suppression techniques from abroad.
Zero Hedge exposed financial ties between Kramer and major tech platforms. They questioned whether his public statements reflect private talks with social media executives.
Summit News shared leaked documents that allegedly show how “foreign entities have long sought to reshape American speech norms” through tech and money pressure.
Some previously viewed these concerns as speculative, but recent developments have drawn increased attention to the issue of foreign influence over American free speech.
VI. Why This Is a Direct Zionist Attack on American Sovereignty
The First Amendment is a core part of American liberty, guaranteeing rights that are protected from outside interference. Recent proposals by a foreign billionaire to restrict these rights have raised concerns about national sovereignty.
Shlomo Kramer’s arrogance—a former member of Israel’s Unit 8200, an elite military intelligence branch [8]—shows the troubling mindset of those who see America’s constitutional freedoms as roadblocks rather than sacred principles. His statement, “it’s time to limit the First Amendment” [3], crosses into matters that only American citizens should decide.
Utah GOP Senator Mike Lee’s simple “No” [9] echoes what every patriotic American feels: our Constitution isn’t open to foreign debate. Former Florida Representative Matt Gaetz stood firm, saying, “No. We aren’t going to do this” [9]. Florida GOP gubernatorial candidate James Fishback backed this up with “Not on my watch” and promised to “always defend the First Amendment” [9].
Without doubt, this goes beyond moderating online content. Kramer’s ties to Israeli cybersecurity raise serious questions about foreign influence over American discourse. Former Mossad director Yossi Cohen’s $30 million investment in Kramer’s company, Cato Networks [8], reveals worrying connections between foreign intelligence operations and attempts to reshape American speech rights.
Americans are encouraged to pay close attention to proposals that could affect First Amendment rights. It is essential to have open discussions about the implications of foreign influence on free speech and to advocate for the protection of constitutional liberties.
History shows that those who want to undermine American sovereignty target our constitutional protections first. A prominent free speech supporter noted, “a favorite tactic of repressive governments and intolerant societies has been to stigmatize opponents with a despised and reprehensible label to suppress dissent” [10]. This matches what we see today.
Our founders created the First Amendment to protect against this exact type of foreign interference. Justice Robert H. Jackson’s famous words still ring true: “If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion” [11]. These words hit home as foreign billionaires try to dictate speech norms to Americans.
The movement to adopt speech restrictions based on foreign models has already started. Over 100 bills penalizing boycotts of Israel have appeared in state and local legislatures in just four years, with 24 states passing such legislation [11]. (State Legislation (Last Updated September 29, 2023) – Legislation, 2023) This shows a troubling pattern of foreign influence over domestic policy.
The author of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition admitted it was “never intended for use in policy” [1]. All the same, people now use this definition to break down students, employees, and professors who support Palestinian rights [1].
Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene spotted this threat, pointing out that “an Israeli cybersecurity billionaire demanding to take away Americans’ guaranteed First Amendment Free Speech” represents “everything we voted against in ’24” [9]. Her words capture the fundamental American principle that foreign entities shouldn’t meddle in our constitutional matters.
Kramer’s call to control social platforms and rank “the authenticity of every person that expresses themselves online” [3] makes this situation more alarming. Such a system would destroy the free exchange of ideas that our republic stands on.
Many Americans oppose foreign interference in constitutional rights. Protecting the First Amendment is seen as essential to maintaining national sovereignty, regardless of outside influence.
VII. Call to Arms: Patriots Rise!
Our founding fathers predicted this! George Washington himself warned that “foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government” [12]. An Israeli billionaire now threatens our constitutional birthright.
“Putting America and Americans first ought to mean putting individual liberty, limited government, free markets, and peace at the core” [13]. We cannot let any foreign entity—especially Tel Aviv tech moguls—dictate terms about our sacred First Amendment.
There are concerns that foreign influence could affect American sovereignty through censorship. Many Americans remain committed to defending liberty and constitutional rights.
Key Takeaways
• Verify claims independently – The article makes serious allegations about foreign influence that should be cross-referenced with multiple credible news sources before accepting as fact.
• Distinguish opinion from evidence – Inflammatory language and emotional appeals don’t constitute proof; look for documented facts and verified quotes from reliable sources.
• Recognize bias indicators – Extreme rhetoric, conspiracy theories, and calls for immediate action without substantiation are red flags requiring skeptical analysis.
• Protect constitutional rights responsibly – While defending free speech is important, be wary of content that promotes division or targets specific groups with unsubstantiated claims.
FAQs
Q1. What did Israeli billionaire Shlomo Kramer say about the First Amendment?
Shlomo Kramer, an Israeli tech entrepreneur, suggested limiting the First Amendment and implementing government control over social media platforms to address concerns about misinformation and cyber warfare.
Q2. How have American politicians responded to Kramer’s comments?
Several U.S. politicians, including Senator Mike Lee and Representative Matt Gaetz, have firmly rejected Kramer’s proposal, emphasizing their commitment to protecting First Amendment rights.
Q3. What is the “8th front war” concept mentioned in relation to free speech? The “8th front war” refers to the idea that, beyond military operations, there’s an alleged campaign targeting American civil liberties, particularly free speech, through technological and policy means.
Q4. How does artificial intelligence factor into concerns about free speech? There are concerns that AI could be used to automatically suppress certain viewpoints online without human intervention, potentially creating systems that make it difficult to express dissenting opinions.
Q5. What actions are being urged in response to perceived threats to free speech? Some are calling for increased awareness, information sharing, contacting political representatives, and public discussion to address concerns about potential restrictions on free speech.
References
[1] – https://www.wrmea.org/2026-january-february/resisting-zionisms-ihra-attack-on-free-speech.html
[2] – https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/us-rejects-international-ai-oversight-un-general-assembly-rcna233478
[3] – https://www.foxbusiness.com/media/israeli-tech-ceo-calls-us-govt-limit-first-amendment-take-control-social-media-prevent-lies
[4] – https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/6/7/adoption-of-anti-semitism-definition-curbs-free-speech-report
[5] – https://www.thefire.org/news/global-free-speech-recession
[6] – https://www.nbcnews.com/world/europe/europeans-push-back-trumps-authoritarian-sanctions-anti-disinformation-rcna250791
[7] – https://elsc.support/resource/academic-freedom-and-freedom-of-speech-in-uk-higher-education-the-adverse-impact-of-the-ihra-definition-of-antisemitism/
[8] – https://www.facebook.com/MintpressNews/posts/israeli-cybersecurity-billionaire-shlomo-kramer-co-founder-of-check-point-and-ce/1171580708503565/
[9] – https://foxnebraska.com/news/nation-world/conservatives-push-back-on-billionaire-who-calls-for-limitations-on-first-amendment
[10] – https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/antisemitism-and-zionism/
[11] – https://www.aclu.org/news/free-speech/latest-attack-free-speech-israel-palestine-debate
[12] – https://constitutionaldiscourse.com/foreign-influence-censorship-and-free-speech-as-an-individual-right/
[13] – https://www.cato.org/free-society/summer-2025/lost-liberalism-america-first
[14] – (December 20, 2023). Meta’s Broken Promises: Systemic Censorship of Palestine Content on Instagram and Facebook. Human Rights Watch. https://www.hrw.org/report/2023/12/21/metas-broken-promises/systemic-censorship-palestine-content-instagram-and
[15] – (September 5, 2025). Police arrest almost 900 at London protest supporting banned group Palestine Action. Associated Press. https://apnews.com/article/b6acca3f6e46cf0fd64ae11d413f5bd8
[16] – Press, A. (March 6, 2024). German police conduct raids against people suspected of posting misogynistic hate speech online. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/31d3e61aab90bdce3f6f0d96e21d0fe4
[17] – Hartmann, D., Oueslati, A. & Staufer, D. (2024). Watching the Watchers: A Comparative Fairness Audit of Cloud-based Content Moderation Services. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.14154. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2406.14154
[18] – (2023). State Legislation (Last Updated September 29, 2023) – Legislation. ADC. https://legislation.adc.org/state-legislation/
[20] – https://x.com/RealAlexJones/status/2007114551712510030?s=20
[21] – https://x.com/RealAlexJones/status/2007090634998358249?s=20
Critical Thinking Dispatch 
Leave a comment